Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition - Part 7

R132549
4 years ago
markrc99

“Demolitions proponents” — Perhaps as suitcaseman may have implied, “controlled demolition” isn’t the correct term with respect to WTC 1 & 2. We could dub our belief something like the Facilitated Uniform Collapse Characteristic Of Free Fall theory… FUCKOFF for short…lol Am I to assume that I have correctly interpreted Greening’s premise or am I asking the wrong people?…lol


R132550
4 years ago
Joe

“Can I see the evidence proving that every analysis contending that the destruction of the WTC towers occurred too quickly to be characteristic of a natural collapse is CIA disinformation?”

Ok, well, by providing blatantly wrong information, they’ve been successfully muddying the waters. The people who really benefit from this are the ones who did the attacks – the CIA, right? So obviously people spreading incorrect information are in on it, or at least too stupid to put 1 and 1 together.

“sorry to disappoint you.”

relax, it just wasn’t clear. I didn’t make the pancake connection, because I don’t put syrup on my pancakes, and the ‘pancake’ explanation for the destruction of the WTC is an oversimplification. But I’ve heard Aunt Jemima used in racist jokes before, so I was wondering what you were trying to say.

Post Modified: 03/04/06 10:45:04

R132551
4 years ago
Joe

““controlled demolition” isn’t the correct term with respect to WTC 1 & 2.”

Too bad it’s the title of the thread. I think you’re stuck with it.


R132555
4 years ago
Joe

You’ll also notice that FUCKOFF (Facilitated Uniform Collapse Characteristic Of Free Fall) “researchers” (and I use that term loosely) deny reality, much like the CIA does. It’s too much of a coincidence. Look at D. P. Grimmer’s paper “Calculations on the Possible Use of Thermite to Melt Sections of the WTC Core Columns.”

“Now the observed time t = 10 seconds (a free fall time, the fastest possible time under g = 9.8 m/sec/sec = 32 ft/sec/sec = 32 ft/s exp2). For the cloud debris creation to absorb 30% of the gravitational energy, the observed time of fall would be 10s x 1.195, or almost 12 seconds. This long a collapse time was observed by no one. Clearly, there are serious flaws in the official explanation/conspiracy theory.”

Estimations run as high as 15 seconds. Why D.P. Grimmer, “researcher”, can’t actually research anything is only explicable by his participation in a CIA disinfo campaign. Everybody else knows how to use the internet. It’s the only explanation.

edit: Or Mossad. He could be Mossad.

Post Modified: 03/04/06 11:14:28

R132557
4 years ago
Smelter

And Now, A word from your Sponsors….

The bush administration remains secrective. In one moment, for instance, the Feds could release all video tapes from the pentagon and dispell the “no plane at the pentagon” myth. It’s no suprise to me that a newly renovated reinforced brick military installation would have a small hole. Such is the debate, yet no resolution is provided by an otherwise “By the people, for the people” organisation.

Synchronicity 9-11 in 3:20

Music Video

..Back to our previously scheduled program..

Post Modified: 03/04/06 11:03:56

R132559
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Synchronicity indeed

If you want to know what Jimmy Walter is talking about in that TV ad about WTC 7, go to 911 Uncovered and clik on WTC 7. You can hear (1) the owner of the WTC complex, Larry Silverstein, say that WTC 7 was pulled, meaning it was brought down by explosives, and (2) Dan Rather say that the collapse of WTC 7 looked like a controlled demolition. That is interesting, because we were led to believe on 911, that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition, because it could not be salvaged and was a hazard. I guess they had to back off that story because of the problem of how long it takes to set up explosives.

Friday, November 12, 2004


R132563
4 years ago
whateveryousay

I don’t think I called the fireman delusional or said they were misquoted. I said you were misquoting them. —joe

i haven’t mis-quoted them. not in the slightest.

the whole “big-blue” thing is interesting and all… but… the purpose seems only to cast doubt on the fdny interviews and all the other eyewitness accounts of explosions.

i find it odd that you would deny explosions even existed until they can be explained as not being bombs…

a natural part of the building’s collapse. —joe

well that’s one way to put it. “natural”.
“freakish effect and actual cause of the collapse” would fit better.

bombs are just the most plausible that’s all. the buildings were a target, they were bombed before, they were hit by planes… terrorist attack: bombs… pretty simple… you don’t need to come up with weird thermite sparking theories unless you’re pretty sure there were no bombs….
“well how would they get them in…? etc and what not…”
not really an issue… maybe even easier than hijacking 4 airplanes… i don’t know.

can some one out there find a decent copy of the “big blue” crane collapse?
and post it or something? then i can show you the difference between blast noise and impact noise.


R132570
4 years ago
Joe

“i find it odd that you would deny explosions even existed until they can be explained as not being bombs…”

I’m pretty sure I said that the explosions or what sounded like explosions could have been explained by the building’s collapse. If you can find where I said otherwise, I’ll freely admit I was wrong and apologize for calling them delusional.

Post Modified: 03/04/06 11:55:04

R132573
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Just to complete Lt. Col. Robert Bowman’s statement, which I posted on the previous page. The complete statement almost word for word. Dr. Bowman is part of the Institute of Space and Security Studies.

High Treason and Conspiracy to Commit Murder

We have three different kinds of information. A lot of these pieces of information taken together prove that the official conspiracy story of 911 is a bunch of hogwash. It is impossible. But they don’t prove what really happened and who is responsible.

But there is a second set of facts having to do with the cover-up. And these are like the confiscation of the surveillance tapes of the impact on the Pentagon and the confiscation of the air traffic control tapes etc. Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who is responsible.

And there is a third set of facts that impinges on the president’s thinking in all of that. These are the facts of what happened after 911, and these are a historical record. For example, Ashcroft and his cronies got their Patriot Act, which takes away our civil liberties and trashes our civil rights. Unocal got its invasion of Afganistan and secured a route for its oil and gas pipeline for a trillion gallons of gas from the Caspian Sea to the Indian Ocean. Cheney’s Halliburton got a no bid contract to support the troops to destroy Iraq and other contracts to rebuild it. The PNAC guys, the neo-cons, got their contracts in Iraq, got their invasion of Iraq, and got regime change in Iraq.

And the questions come, who gained from 911? Who covered up crucial information about 911? Who put the patently false stories out about 911 to begin with? The answer is highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Cheney. The very kindest thing that we can say is they were aware of the impending attacks and let them happen. Some will say that is too kind. But even that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder.

short video

longer video at Snowshoe Films

Post Modified: 03/04/06 13:25:14

R132578
4 years ago
Shogo

If you want to know what Jimmy Walter is talking about

When Jimmy Walker exclaimed “Dyn-O-Mite!” it was intended as an expression of joy and happiness. He didn’t literally mean dynomite.

Hope that clears things up.


R132589
4 years ago
whateveryousay

I’m pretty sure I said that the explosions or what sounded like explosions could have been explained by the building’s collapse. If you can find where I said otherwise, I’ll freely admit I was wrong and apologize for calling them delusional.

bare in mind that the exploisions are the cause of the collapse according to greening’s aluminum theory… not a by-product of the collapse… it’s a very important position to be aware of.


R132636
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Exactly, there is a timing issue with these explosions. The buildings were not collapsing all the time. Explosions were heard before the collapses.


R132650
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

The Cacchioli story is a good example of the timing. At first, Cacchioli talked about loud bangs. He also talked about being pressured into changing his story. Then he decided he might have heard the floors pancake. But if you analyze his story, that is impossible, because he was at the level of the 23rd floor of the North Tower. It is too early for the floors to be pancaking.

When Cacchioli entered the 23rd floor, he found a “little man” holding a handkerchief in front of his face and hiding under the standpipes on the wall, used for pumping water on the floor in case of fire. Leading the man by the arm, he then ran into a group down the hall of about 35 to 40 people, finding his way down the 23rd floor stairwell and beginning their descent to safety. “Then as soon as we get in the stairwell, I hear another huge explosion like the other two. Then I heard bang, bang, bang – huge bangs – and surmised later it was the floors pan caking on top of one another”.

That is impossible. He was hearing explosions.

Post Modified: 03/04/06 13:49:12

R132686
4 years ago
Continuity

I find it incredible that Greening has come to this hypothetical conclusion. Molten aluminum fragged the WTC towers? The syrup made all the pancakes fall? Bizarre…

I bet molten aluminum, at a temperature of 800c, could have been poured over the WTC towers for hours, producing no significant damage (other than office fires).


R132695
4 years ago
Joe

“Molten aluminum fragged the WTC towers?”

I didn’t read that. In the paper I linked to he suggests it may have contributed to and/or initiated the collapse, along with a lot of other damage. If you can refute his evidence, you’re free to email the guy, he seems to take an interest in conspiracy people.

“I bet molten aluminum, at a temperature of 800c, could have been poured over the WTC towers for hours, producing no significant damage (other than office fires).”

Care to explain the physics behind this very ridiculous statement?

Post Modified: 03/04/06 16:15:33

R132703
4 years ago
markrc99

Joe, we agree that 10 secs was too short an account of the time elapsed. I also agree that it’s in the interest of the CIA and the interests it serves to control as many perspectives as possible regarding any particular event. However, the public exposure level of some of these experts is comparatively lacking, Im sure you would agree. Given the free fall- plus variables estimate of 12 secs, it’s difficult to determine through all that smoke how much more collapsing was occurring after that point. Perhaps more relevant is that it’s my understanding that the floors pancaking upon one another could not of possibly occurred in less than 20 secs. Is that true? Again, I was hoping you’d address Greening’s contention.

Post Modified: 03/04/06 15:38:14

R132724
4 years ago
Joe

“I was hoping you’d address Greening’s contention.”

I didn’t know where to begin.

“how does this explain the explosions at the base of the building?”

There’s a video online where you can see the the base of WTC2 as the building collapses. It appears to be intact, so I’m not sure what explosions you’re talking about.

pic deleted

“Greening concurs that themite-induced reactions brought down the towers.”

He proposes it’s possible based on the available evidence. It’s not the same thing as saying ‘It happened this way.’

“Specific substances mixing together would irrefutably be isolated to a small percentage of the building, perhaps as little as a few floors, even though he described the destruction as a “global collapse.””

He contends that they were isolated to a small percentage of the buildings, eventually causing the floor to collapse onto the one below, causing more reactions on the floor below, plus damage due to gravity.

“Perhaps more relevant is that it’s my understanding that the floors pancaking upon one another could not of possibly occurred in less than 20 secs. Is that true?”

I don’t think so?

Post Modified: 03/16/06 18:13:40

R132729
4 years ago
Chickenma1

The way I read Greening is that rust plus gypsum/concrete acts as iron oxide when mixed with aluminum. That’s a compelling theory, but would have caused the buildings to collapse in different ways and to different degrees, IMHO, since one plane only penetrated one corner. It is the uniformity and identicalness of the collapses that raises suspicion, and especially when you factor in Bldg. 7.

Anyway, Greening’s theory should be easy to model – hopefully, someone will do it.


R132737
4 years ago
Continuity

Joe: Care to explain the physics behind this very ridiculous statement?

Why is that a ridiculous statement? Care to explain that?

800c is around the maximum temperature estimated. It’s very hot, but not crazy hot. Aluminum at 800c exposed to a colossal network of huge, long steel girders encased in tons and tons of concrete would not destroy such structures, nor even cause major damage. It would heat them up, eat away lesser material, yet the heat would naturally redistribute through tough structural steel and huge concrete slabs. Aluminum would spill away throughout the course of the event, moving away from the heat.

If you want to destroy these things with molten aluminum, you’d have to heat aluminum to much higher levels.

I’m also doubtful of this extraordinary model of aluminum causing enormous explosions. That’s an unlikely model with not much precedent, as far as I know.

In Whatever’s video of molten yellow fluid spilling from WTC2, this fluid caused no explosive cracking of concrete.


R132740
4 years ago
Continuity

ChickenMa: It is the uniformity and identicalness of the collapses that raises suspicion…

Yes. A few sections of the damaged floors — if they were hypotheticlly comprised by molten aluminum — would give away. Which is to say there would be more of an asymmetrical and asynchronous collapse. Whereas what happened was more of a general, all-at-once collapse, with most every section of the core more or less failing at once.

Arguably, not all of WTC2’s core columns failed simultaneously (most did), hence the momentary lean. But in the case of WTC1, it was a general, symmetrical and synchronous collapse. Each core column failed precisely at the same time.

Post Modified: 03/04/06 17:51:32

R132772
4 years ago
whateveryousay

greening’s theory is perfectly plausible.

but it’s not so much about thermite sparking are aluminum/water reactions…

i you look at the south-tower… the mechanical floor explode violently… but only after a slightly less violent explosion from above a few floors. there would be a fair amount of water on the mechanical floors.

the north tower is different… but you have the 110th floor with 15000 gallons of water stored in tank … if that gave way and spilled onto tons of molten aluminum i guessing it would kind of go “bang” n shit.

did i mention that greening has a problem with the official story of bldng7?

that should be typical though…. any independent researcher who gets involved in this shit is goin to run into some “hey wait a second” issues…

joe’s problem is that he figures he has the ‘conspiracy mindset’ essentially pegged and can have a good chuckle about how dumb people can be. sure. people can buy into some pretty wacked out shit… but the official story doesn’t have so much evidence, just authority behind it. hey waht was the name of that guy who claimed to have invented the telescope again?


R132776
4 years ago
Chickenma1

“hey waht was the name of that guy who claimed to have invented the telescope again?”

Al Gore?


R132791
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Simple Logic II

Excerpt

This is the second part of an article entitled “Simple Logic Exposes the Truth” that illustrates how logic and common sense can be used to come to reasonable conclusions about what really caused the collapses that day, without having to wade through complicated and often conflicting technical reports from engineers and government talking heads.

History is a great teacher, so lets look back in time. Has catastrophic damage to any building of any size caused a collapse in the manner we saw on 9/11? Because if something can happen three times in one day, it must be fairly commonplace correct? Physics doesn’t behave any differently from one day to the next, something that can happen today, can also happen tomorrow, and could have happened in the past. Something that happened three times in one day has undoubtedly happened before, either something is possible or it isn’t.

However, this is not the case. Regardless of what caused the damage, collapses like we saw on 9/11 has never happened before or since 9/11. Everyday, throughout the world, buildings endure damage from
hurricanes, missiles, bombs, fires, etc, and they suffer catastrophic damage of some sort, and yet they never react the same way.

My opinion, three buildings in one day, with three different experiences, all doing the same thing, not a chance.

Post Modified: 03/04/06 22:27:39

R132821
4 years ago
Chickenma1

I like it, Suitcaseman. If we look back at the history of the Bush family cabal, we also gleen some information that can lead to logical conclusions. I makes me mad that each new outrage perpetrated by them is examined in a historical vacuum, and each new incident treated as isolated.


R132853
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Confusion is the name of the game, when it is just this simple.

Great quote

First of all, looking back in history, what is the likely cause of the collapses? Controlled demolition of course, that is the only occurrence in the past that has caused building collapses, at freefall speed, into their own footprint, while expelling huge amounts of dust.

Simple Logic II

Post Modified: 03/05/06 08:09:00

R132865
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Simple Logic I is available, among other places, at 911 Blogger

It looks like it ends after six paragraphs, but it does not, keep scrolling, because there is more.

Post Modified: 03/05/06 09:23:32

R132884
4 years ago
reprehensor

Re: Greening.

Jones did a couple of experiments in response to Greening’s “study”.

Experiments Testing Greening’s Hypothesis Regarding Molten Aluminum

Poster “Gordon” at Physorg also sees some problems with Greening’s “study”.

Gordon’s Dissertation


R132980
4 years ago
Shogo

yet the heat would naturally redistribute through tough structural steel and huge concrete slabs.

Concrete is a poor conductor of heat. Also, the concrete slab is laid on top of the steel floor supports. There isn’t concrete slab beneath the floor supports. I wouldn’t make the argument that molten aluminum is the culprit behind the collapse, however its presence would certainly indicate that temperatures were in excess of 800 degrees – which would be sufficient to weaken the structural integrity of the floor supports.

The heat-conducting properties of metal are precisely why the fires caused such damage. With fires spread over such a large surface area, that’s a lot of heat being applied to the steel, which easily explains how the strength of the steel was compromised.

Which is to say there would be more of an asymmetrical and asynchronous collapse. Whereas what happened was more of a general, all-at-once collapse, with most every section of the core more or less failing at once.

I’d say that’s a giant bit of conjecture. You already state that WTC2 didn’t follow this pattern as indicated by the leaning, but the reality is that what might appear to be simultaneous may be asynchronous. Without seeing it up close, it’s impossible to determine with any degree of certainty. However once the first collapse takes place, the rest would follow suit in rapid succession, due to the tremendous amount of downward force.

the official story doesn’t have so much evidence, just authority behind it.

That’s just ridiculous. There’s ample evidence, considering the “official story” consists of the planes hitting the buildings, and the damage from the impact and the damage of the fires caused the collapse. We have planes, we have crashes, we have jet fuel, we have long-burning fires, we have collapses. That’s called a theory that fits the available evidence.


R132996
4 years ago
whateveryousay

I wouldn’t make the argument that molten aluminum is the culprit behind the collapse, however its presence would certainly indicate that temperatures were in excess of 800 degrees -shogo

as greening points out, the aluminum alloys soften and melt at 500 -550


R133000
4 years ago
Chickenma1

“We have planes, we have crashes, we have jet fuel, we have long-burning fires, we have collapses. That’s called a theory that fits the available evidence.”

Wow, 23 pages and it was all so simple…


R133003
4 years ago
Shogo

It was just as true 23 pages ago.


R133006
4 years ago
Chickenma1

That’s the theory the ignores the available evidence (22 pages of it).


R133011
4 years ago
Shogo

Speculation and conjecture isn’t evidence.


R133025
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

We have planes, we have crashes, we have jet fuel, we have long-burning fires, we have collapses. That’s called a theory that fits the available evidence.

Building 7?


R133035
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

While Jones’ overall expertise in physics is an extremely valuable asset for the scientific investigation of the collapses, his special knowledge of the physics of metals makes him uniquely qualified to examine the molten metal evidence. Unfortunately, like several other reported collapse anomalies, this line of inquiry may be inherently inconclusive due to lack of other forms of evidence (such as photographs and physical artifacts) to corroborate the eyewitness accounts, and potential explanations for the molten metal unrelated to demolition.

source


R133038
4 years ago
Chickenma1

How did I miss that bldg 7 had 24 steel columns in the center?


R133043
4 years ago
Continuity

Exact melting point of Aluminum is 660c or 1220ish F

But I need to find a source that describes or disproves any colour change in aluminum once it’s heated beyond that. In other words, that damn bright yellow in the vid.


R133044
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Continuity, colors in any video can’t be trusted. However, the colors in the building video and the thermite video were similar, and the BEHAVIOR/TEXTURE was really similar.


R133054
4 years ago
whateveryousay

Exact melting point of Aluminum is 660c or 1220ish

the alloys used in planes melt at lower temps. 550C or so…


R133099
4 years ago
Shogo

Building 7

Building 7 was severely damaged from falling debris that gouged massive holes in the structure, and it was on fire for several hours.

I need to find a source that describes or disproves any colour change in aluminum

Cherry picker.


R133107
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

There are massive holes in your brain, and it has been on fire for several months, and you are still going like the Everready Rabbit.

Post Modified: 03/06/06 07:55:11

R133108
4 years ago
Snark

I’ve seen molten aluminum. It was still silver.

Post Modified: 03/06/06 07:57:58

R133118
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Stephen E. Jones

Education
In 1973, Jones earned his bachelors degree in physics, magna cum laude with honors, from Brigham Young University, and his PhD in physics from Vanderbilt University in 1978. Jones conducted his PhD research at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center from 1974 to 1977), and post-doctoral research at Cornell University and the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility.

Wikipedia

Post Modified: 03/06/06 08:42:00

R133123
4 years ago
Shogo

There are massive holes in your brain, and it has been on fire for several months, and you are still going like the Everready Rabbit.

Weak.


R133124
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Similarly, contributors to Wikipedia tried to continually focus on the idea that Jones had not discussed what type of metal the ‘molten metal’ could be. Indeed, Jones states that he does not know this fact, and calls for the release of all data in order to help determine what it might be. Trying to corner Jones into suggesting he knows the type of metal involved is a way to attempt to shackle Jones with disinformation for which he can be exposed as wrong if the documentation is ever released. Some posting to Jones page even overtly suggested the metal must be aluminum, something Jones has not stated.

source


R133125
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Although the molten metal observations are not presently conclusive, Jones continues to collect evidence and expand his analysis in this area using his special expertise in metallurgy.

source


R133127
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Indeed, while many structural engineers have supported the NIST and FEMA reports, Jones has underscored how these reports also include disclaimers that stop short of any final conclusions, such as, “With the information and time available, the sequence of events leading to the collapse of each Tower could not be definitively determined,” and, “The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time”. Furthermore, the local KUTV news station, Deseret Morning News, MSNBC, the Pittsburgh Tribune Review and others, have felt that Jones’ questions do deserve to be heard.

source


R133129
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Conclusions

I have called attention to glaring inadequacies in the “final” reports funded by the US government and shown evidences for a likely alternative hypothesis. In particular, the official theory lacks repeatability in that no actual models or buildings (before or since 9-11-01) have been observed to completely collapse due to the proposed fire-based mechanisms. On the other hand, dozens of buildings have been completely and symmetrically demolished through the use of pre-positioned explosives. And high-temperature chemical reactions can account for the observed large pools of molten metal, under both Towers and WTC 7, and the sulfidation of structural steel. The controlled-demolition hypothesis better satisfies tests of repeatability and parsimony and therefore is not “junk science.” It ought to be seriously, scientifically investigated and debated.

A truly independent, international panel would consider all viable hypotheses, including the pre-positioned-explosives theory, guided not by politicized notions and constraints, but rather by observations and calculations, to reach a scientific conclusion. Questioning (preferably under oath) of officials who approved the rapid removal and destruction of the WTC steel beams and columns before they could be properly analyzed – and others as outlined above – should proceed in the United States.

None of the government-funded studies have provided serious analyses of the explosive demolition hypothesis at all. Until the above steps are taken, the case for accusing ill-trained Muslims of causing all the destruction on 9-11-01 is far from compelling. It just does not add up.

And that fact should be of great concern to Americans. (Ryan, 2004). Clearly, we must find out what really caused the WTC skyscrapers to collapse as they did. The implications of what happened on 9/11/2001 clearly supercede partisan politics. Physics sheds light on the issue which we ignore to our peril as we contemplate the wars that have been and may yet be justified on the basis of the 9/11 tragedy and its “official” interpretation.

To this end, NIST must release the 6,899 photographs and over 300 hours of video recordings – acquired mostly by private parties – which it admits to holding (NIST, 2005, p. 81). Evidence relating to WTC 7 and its mysterious collapse must not be held back. In particular, photos and analyses of the molten metal (probably not molten steel) observed in the basements of both Towers and WTC7 need to be brought forth to the international community of scientists and engineers immediately. Therefore, along with others, I call for the release of these and all relevant data for scrutiny by a cross-disciplinary, international team of researchers. The explosive-demolition hypothesis will be considered: all options will be on the table.

Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?

Post Modified: 03/06/06 09:02:07

R133133
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

We need people with the type of credentials that Stephen Jones has, in order to pursue these arguments.


R133134
4 years ago
whateveryousay

I’ve seen molten aluminum. It was still silver.

perhaps that’s because it melts at a low temperature.
i’d suppose it would glow yellow if you heated it up enough. the aluminum oxide melts at over 1900C though and i’m kind of assuming that’s why it stays silver in colour when the base metal melts.
but i don’t know really.


R133136
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

In the meantime, I’ll stick to Simple Logic I and Simple Logic II


R133142
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

I agree with Somebigguy, when he says

Now if we are to believe that three buildings can collapse in this fashion in one day, then there must be some historical precedent for such an event. Images of what happens to buildings after suffering a structural failure have been provided in this document. Additionally, images of what happens to steel framed buildings during an inferno have also been provided. Where is the historical precedent for steel framed buildings being reduced to dust due to office fires?

Answer, there are none. Are we to believe that three buildings collapsed in one day in a manner that has never occurred previously in the history of mankind?

Post Modified: 03/06/06 09:24:42

R133145
4 years ago
Snark

Now if we are to believe that three buildings can collapse in this fashion in one day, then there must be some historical precedent for such an event.

I think this is specious reasoning. Things happen without historical precedent all the time; the formation of this planet, the evolution of new species, the invention of the computer, the formation of the internet… Just because something has never happened before is not sufficient reason to reject the idea that it happened. I fail to think of any other time that 757’s have been flown into 110-story office buildings in dense urban areas, either.

Post Modified: 03/06/06 09:41:27

R133148
4 years ago
Shogo

I’ve made that same argument. It fails to register in the minds of conspiracy droids.


R133151
4 years ago
YT_

Just because something has never happened before is not sufficient reason to reject the idea that it happened.

Is someone saying that it didn’t happen?


R133152
4 years ago
lday

Snark,
Indeed, ‘it never happened before’ isn’t much of an argument.
However Republics suddenly evolving into Empires is a common pattern,
e.g. Rome with Julius Caesar, France with Napoleon or Germany with Adolph.


R133157
4 years ago
whateveryousay

the formation of this planet

weak.
that didn’t bend any physics.


R133159
4 years ago
Shogo

that didn’t bend any physics.

Neither did the WTC.


R133164
4 years ago
whateveryousay

Neither did the WTC.

well, no. but the official story seems to have painted itself into a corner and kind of has to bend a few rules in order to funtion.


R133171
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

I fail to think of any other time that 757’s have been flown into 110-story office buildings in dense urban areas, either.

You conveniently ignore Building 7.


R133182
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Not to mention the fact, that even if it was the first time planes crashed into buildings etc., we still have to deal with the issues Jones raises such as the symmetry of the collapses, the speed of the collapses, the characteristics of dust jets, the reports of molten metal in the debris piles, and the failures of the official collapse theories, because that is what has never happened before without controlled demolitions.

Also, what about dealing with our limitations, Snark? What about engaging in these arguments, when the buildings collapsed how many years ago?


R133183
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

As much as you don’t want to hear it, you guys do not have the qualifications to discuss these issues beyond a certain point, period.


R133184
4 years ago
YT_

Things happen without historical precedent all the time… the invention of the computer, the formation of the internet

Snark, you’re comparing the WTC demolitions to the invention of the computer and the interntet? A lot of work went into those, huh?


R133195
4 years ago
Number5Toad

As much as you don’t want to hear it, you guys do not have the qualifications to discuss these issues beyond a certain point, period

sorry, but who here does???


R133196
4 years ago
whateveryousay

didn’t the military invent the internet?

or is that just conspiracy talk?


R133224
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Number 5,

That is what I am saying. At a certain point we have to defer to the experts. There is circumstantial evidence that we may be qualified to talk about, there are the statements of the firemen, which we may or may not agree with, we can comment on that, and there are plenty of other things we can discuss. But, when it comes to the towers, even Professor Jones has said that too much of the evidence was disposed of, or too much of the evidence is unavailable, to make an informed opinion, so even experts are limited in that respect

When an expert gets up on the stand at trial, the first thing they do is ask for his credentials. The expert has to be qualified to talk about the subject matter, period. I will listen to Stephen Jones, because he appears to be qualified to talk about how the towers came down.

Post Modified: 03/06/06 11:41:03

R133232
4 years ago
Shogo

You conveniently ignore Building 7.

Building 7 was pummeled with massive chunks of concrete and was burning for hours.

It is you who is conveniently ignoring the transcripts of FDNY communications discussing the bulging of WTC7, and the extent of physical damage the structure underwent.

You just keep yelling “Building 7!”, as though that magically proves anything.


R133234
4 years ago
Number5Toad

At a certain point we have to defer to the experts

yes, agreed. the problem with this debate, however, continues to be the sheer number of experts on both sides who have compelling evidence for their case, as well as the sheer number of philistines posing as experts.

you choose to believe Professor Jones, that’s fine with me. others here choose not to believe him, that’s fine with me too. i don’t see why that shouldn’t be the end of this particular debate – people have chosen their sides and aren’t likely to be swayed by arguments from the other side. of course i’m not naive enough to think it’ll actually stop there, but i figure i should pop in about once every 5 pages to make my case ;-)

by the way, i met Sander this morning and grabbed a copy of his book, The Big Wedding. i started to read it on the train, it’s incredibly well written, well sourced, and compelling…i’d recommend it for everyone on both sides of this thread.


R133235
4 years ago
Shogo

I will listen to Stephen Jones, because he appears to be qualified to talk about how the towers came down.

No he doesn’t. He’s a physics professor, not an engineer. Why would you listen to him over someone like Dr. Asif Usmani, who is both a structural engineer, and someone who specifically devotes himself to the effects of fire on large structures?


R133236
4 years ago
Shogo

however, continues to be the sheer number of experts on both sides who have compelling evidence for their case

I would dispute this, actually. I would argue that the so-called experts that pimp the demolitions angle routinely play fast-and-loose with the facts, and almost always seem to misinterpret key pieces of evidence. For example, Dr. Judy Wood and her misreading of the seismic and video data.


R133240
4 years ago
YT_

of course i’m not naive enough to think it’ll actually stop there, but i figure i should pop in about once every 5 pages to make my case

See you on page 28!

by the way, i met Sander this morning and grabbed a copy of his book, The Big Wedding. i started to read it on the train, it’s incredibly well written, well sourced, and compelling…i’d recommend it for everyone on both sides of this thread.

Agreed, it’s a great book. I think it would have benefitted from a bit more editorial oversight, but the research and content is awesome.


R133245
4 years ago
Number5Toad

I would argue that the so-called experts that pimp the demolitions angle routinely play fast-and-loose with the facts, and almost always seem to misinterpret key pieces of evidence

in my defense, i only said the evidence was compelling. convincing is another thing all together.

See you on page 28!

i’ll be there. lemme pencil it in on my calendar….


R133252
4 years ago
Joe

“You conveniently ignore Building 7.”

And the WTC Controlled Demolition theorists ignore Big Blue. Where’s the research on this mysterious collapse? Nothing hit it at all, and there were no collapsing 110 story buildings around it to damage it. Eyewitness reports confirm the use of bombs to make it come down.


R133259
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Building 7 was pummeled with massive chunks of concrete and was burning for hours.

That would not cause it to come down the way it did.


R133266
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Where was I reading, was it about the NIST report, they had to admit they could not explain how Building 7 came down?


R133270
4 years ago
YT_

No, they just delayed the release of their report on WTC 7 by a year or so. They’re tryin’ to come up with something…


R133274
4 years ago
Shogo

That would not cause it to come down the way it did.

Sez you, Mr. Anonymous Internet Poster.


R133278
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Says anybody with some common sense.


R133281
4 years ago
Number5Toad

so the firefighters who saw the building bulge, who observed the enormous holes in it and the fires, and who said they knew it was about to come down, had no common sense?

wait, this isn’t page 28….shit, my bad.


R133284
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Listen, bulge this bulge that, doesn’t explain how it came down like a controlled demolition.


R133286
4 years ago
Shogo

bulge this bulge that

Just because to you, based on video shot from several blocks, it appeared as like a controlled demolition from the back of the building, doesn’t mean it was. You have no view of the front or sides of the building. Considering that neighboring buildings were severely damaged by debris from 7s collapse, it’s clearly not a controlled demolition.


R133287
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

I told you, you and others have a bulge for this thread. Start your own thread.


R133289
4 years ago
Shogo

Start your own thread.


R133291
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Going around in circles.


R133294
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

If the government did not have anything to hide, it would not be hiding anything.

Post Modified: 03/06/06 13:55:38

R133295
4 years ago
Shogo

You noticed?

That’s why I say fuck it, make with the tubgirl and let’s bring this shit to a proper conclusion.


R133296
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

People love to talk about this stuff.


R133298
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Didn’t anybody do a report on last night’s 60 Minutes segment on the seed man?

Post Modified: 03/06/06 14:01:02

R133393
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Stephen Jones presentation

There certainly can’t be any harm in checking this presentation out.

Post Modified: 03/06/06 18:37:18

R133398
4 years ago
whateveryousay

so the firefighters who saw the building bulge, who observed the enormous holes in it and the fires, and who said they knew it was about to come down, had no common sense? -5

the bulge and transit stuff are conspicuously missing from the fema and nist (draft) reports. that and a lot of other stuff.

Considering that neighbouring buildings were severely damaged by debris from 7s collapse, it’s clearly not a controlled demolition. -shogo

that’s not a good argument.
the well planned explosive demolition of the j.l. hudson building caused millions in damage to neighbouring structures… namely the raised metro line.

did i mention that you can see blue flash marks on the bldng7 steel at the points where the joints were severed? if i’m not mistaken, that’s what you get when you cut steel with rdx.


R133437
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Well what does the laid-back Stephen Jones say about Building 7?

Building 7 collapsed straight down rapidly. FEMA said that it had a small debris field “suggesting internal failure and implosion”. There was steel that appeared to be evaporated. Jones said that the damage was limited to the south side, and that if it fell because of the damage, it should have fallen toward the southwest corner, because it would have fallen immediately to the side where it was damaged.

Jones said that there was nothing severed in the core, but it collapsed straight down rapidly. Then he said only a handful of companies in the world know how to demolish buildings like 7, it is not so easy. Buildings that fall because of damage topple, twist, bend, and cause more damage than 7 did.

Jones said Building 7 was over a football field away from the closest tower (1 or 2). He said it took 6.6 seconds to collapse, despite the fact that there were 24 steel columns and the concrete resisting the collapse. He said the freefall time, if you drop an apple off the roof, with no air resisting, is 6 seconds, but you have all of this material in the way, one floor hitting a stationary floor slows it down. Jones said this violates law of physics, specifically the law of conservation of momentum.

Jones said that the 911 Commission Report did not even mention the collapse of Building 7, then he said I almost rest my case and laughed. He said that this is very suspicious and sad and not good science to neglect data that is in your face, so important.

He said that the FEMA Report said that there was a low probability that fire caused the collapse of 7. Jones said that NIST, which is another government- sponsored agency like FEMA, at first decoupled their analysis from 1 and 2.

Last month, he said, NIST said it is going to hire contractors to figure out the collapse of 7. Jones said why not look at explosives, because none of these studies look at explosives.

Jones later mentioned that he was unable to show the collapse of Building 7 on MSNBC, because MSNBC declined to show it. Then he asked how many people in the audience were seeing the collapse of Building 7 for the first time and remarked that there were quite a few.

Post Modified: 03/06/06 20:57:41

R133463
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Shogo, your fire engineer had a good reason why a fire could cause the buildings to fall – he did not address the speed at which they fell, which is more of a physics problem.


R133466
4 years ago
YT_

the laid-back Stephen Jones

haha Dr. Jones is dreamy


R133472
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

That is a pretty interesting presentation. He laughs a lot. Pretty pretty interesting. It reminds me of General Parton’s presentation on Oklahoma available here.

Post Modified: 03/06/06 21:10:42

R133587
4 years ago
neverknwo

Well you cannot expect standard Commercial Airline Pilots to know about (CLASSIFIED).

OPS BLACKSTAR is Highly Compartmented, Secret Fire-Command & Control Platform System that flies out of Holloman AFB NM./FT. Huachuca, AZ (BLACKBAG OPS).

Combine BLACKSTAR (Pilotless) and Thiokol’s Corps. Portal Transport Systems (illegally downloaded by Wen Ho Lee, at Los Alamos), and You can control ANY AIRCRAFT THAT IS FBW.

*Remember that OPS BLACKSTAR has broadcast dissemination capabilities to 100 Aircraft at one time8 (AWACS, ASARS, JSTARS, TENCAP, TROJAN SPIRIT, GUARDRAIL-CS, UAV’s, SIGINT, TEAMMATE, TRACKWOLF, REMBASS, HUMINT, CI IMINT, MASINT, TECHINT, JTF, ARF-OR, ACE, JIC, ACT) for an effective INTELLIGENCE BOS.


R134570
4 years ago
cortez

the pics from the video whatever posted, being compared to a thermite reaction

Link

Post Modified: 03/09/06 20:18:52

R134944
4 years ago
cortez

We wouldn’t even need this thread if they let him do his job


R134978
4 years ago
YT_

The thermite comparison is pretty interesting.


R135078
4 years ago
cortez

let’s move this…


R135079
4 years ago
cortez

to page 24



R135080
4 years ago
cortez

Repost

the pics from the video whatever posted, being compared to a thermite reaction

Link


R135085
4 years ago
CIAlien


R135086
4 years ago
sisyphus

toadyou choose to believe Professor Jones, that’s fine with me. others here choose not to believe him, that’s fine with me too. i don’t see why that shouldn’t be the end of this particular debate – people have chosen their sides and aren’t likely to be swayed by arguments from the other side. of course i’m not naive enough to think it’ll actually stop there, but i figure i should pop in about once every 5 pages to make my case

yep, this shit is out of hand – and exactly the divisive back-and-forth with no end in sight that “they” want people to do.

have fun, I’ll check back when you get to page 30.


R135088
4 years ago
YT_

no prob, l8r


R135109
4 years ago
fennec


R135116
4 years ago
whateveryousay


R135123
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

What people saw, watching the collapses on television or live, cannot be explained by the impact of the planes or the fires, or the combination of the two. There has been a general failure to consider explosives, since the buildings collapsed straight down rapidly, without allowing the time for resistance of concrete and steel.

Post Modified: 03/11/06 14:33:51

R135131
4 years ago
Joe

“Didn’t anybody do a report on last night’s 60 Minutes segment on the seed man?”

Marc Emery on 60 Minutes – This Sunday


R135335
4 years ago
zark

suitcaseman:

That is a pretty interesting presentation. He laughs a lot. Pretty pretty interesting. It reminds me of General Parton’s presentation on Oklahoma available here

just watched the patton video and then went on, through pattons recommendation, to watch Waco: The rules of engagement . WOW, the barefaced lies by the officials is legendary.

everyone seen the 911 Eyewitness <<<<<<>


R135408
4 years ago
cortez

moving some stuff I posted on other threads to the mother of all WTC threads

The question has been brought up in regard to WTC 7, since it is not as massive as the other towers is the heat potential still enough to melt large amounts of metal?

or the quote I have pasted in the past about the steel in WTC7

‘Fire and the structural damage …would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated’, Dr. [Jonathan] Barnett said. (Glanz, 2001)

This is from georgewashington.blogspot.com

and this site

———————————

A thermal sensor flown at 5,000 feet over Ground Zero, provided imagery to track the underground fires that burned for weeks. The hottest areas of the rubble appear in shades of purple. The thermal imagery was overlaid on a map database that shows the footprints of the destroyed buildings in red lines. The standing buildings are indicated by green lines.


(SEP 16/2001)


(OCT 18/2001)


(FEB 12/2002)

——


R135409
4 years ago
cortez

Here’s an example of the Controlled Demolition of market square arena (much shorter building than The WTC)

The dome was perforated with explosives to let the air out quickly (in case the question is asked)
——-

...The end came in only 12 seconds. At precisely 7:00 AM, Controlled Demolition set off a series of loud bangs – blasting caps that started chain-reaction explosions. They were followed by one large explosion which started the roof dome collapse, and a second smaller explosion which cut the steel support ring around the building into neat pieces….

Link

Post Modified: 03/12/06 19:06:21

R135410
4 years ago
cortez

Having downloaded and watched “The World’s Best Implosions” recently which focused on Controlled Demolition Inc. and the Loizeaux family. I get the impression that at a master level CD is an art form and events can be done in various order to bring down a structure.

a transcript of a NOVA broadcast with the Loizeaux family (not the same show I watched, but has some insight as to how a controlled demolition is planned)

—————-

NARRATOR: The Loizeaux family has masterminded some of the world’s most spectacular demolition jobs, like the Dunes Hotel in Los Vegas, which was accompanied by a cascade of pyrotechnic effects….

...The result was blasting gelatin, which retained the power of nitroglycerine and was as safe as dynamite. Blasting gel is still used today. Demolition engineer Mark Loizeaux is setting charges inside a large apartment complex scheduled for destruction in Dundee, Scotland.

MARK LOIZEAUX: It’s got a lot of power, a lot of shattering ability, and the cantilevers that we’re dealing with are highly reinforced. They’re carrying a tremendous load of the seventeen-story building above it. So, with all that reinforcing steel, we needed to be sure that we took the cantilevers out. We’ve got about 1,570 separate charges in the building, and they’re all wired together in what is called “parallel series.” Once we push the button, all of them go off on a given cue.

NARRATOR: On this job, Mark is helped by his daughter Stacey.

STACEY LOIZEAUX: This center will be the first point of motion, center of the structure, and it will walk this way.

MARK LOIZEAUX: And the point is, it will move when it’s ready. We simply give it a bit of a push, and we wait for the structure to respond, and then our timing, with delays, moves just ahead of what the structure is likely to do. We call it cajoling, forceful persuasion. That’s what explosives are all about. They’re a catalyst, nothing more….

Link

Post Modified: 03/12/06 19:12:52

R135414
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

The Legend of United Flight 93

by Ted Rall
March 8, 2006

On the first anniversary of the crash of United Airlines Flight 93, Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge delivered a speech at the site of the disaster in western Pennsylvania. “Faced with the most frightening circumstances one could possibly imagine,” he told grieving relatives of the passengers and crewmembers aboard the fourth plane hijacked on 9/11, “they met the challenge like citizen soldiers, like Americans.” He recited the now-familiar story of passengers learning by phone about the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, deciding to fight back and breaking into the cockpit—a heroic act that led to their own deaths while sparing countless others in Washington.

“The terrorists were right to fear an uprising,” Ridge rhapsodized. “The passengers and crew did whatever they humanly could—boil water, phone the authorities, and ultimately rush the cockpit to foil the attack.”

Ridge’s boss repeatedly used United 93 to close his standard stump speech. Calling the passenger revolt “the most vivid and sad symbol of them all,” George W. Bush said: “People are flying across the country on an airplane, at least they thought they were. They learned the plane was going to be used as a weapon. They got on their telephones. They were told the true story. Many of them told their loved ones goodbye. They said they loved them. They said a prayer; a prayer was said. One guy said, ‘Let’s roll.’ They took the plane into the ground.”

The legend of Flight 93 had everything a nation caught with its pants down needed to feel better about itself: guts, heroism, self-sacrifice. Best of all, it was marketable—by Hollywood and by a president willing to surf on a kind of heroism notably absent from his own life. (Theatrical release of the second “United 93” movie is scheduled to open April 28.) Lisa Beamer, widow of the passenger credited with the call-to-arms “let’s roll,” wrote a bestselling book by the same name, applied for a trademark on the expression, and is now working the Christianist lecture circuit.

Actually, the 9/11 Commission found, the evidence indicates that what Todd Beamer (or someone else) said was not “let’s roll,” but “roll it”—possibly referring to an airplane service cart the passengers may have wanted to use to break down the door into the cockpit. Too bad-. “Roll it” sounds less cinematic, and more like a book about cinematography.

The first indication that government officials were covering up the truth about United 93 came with their refusal to make public the cockpit voice recording (CVR). Releasing CVRs after a crash has long been standard practice; pilots’ last, usually profane, utterances have become a cliché. Yet the FBI stonewalled victims’ relatives for months after 9/11.

“While we empathize with the grieving families,” assistant director John Collingwood wrote one widow, “we do not believe that the horror captured on the cockpit voice recording will console them in any way.” And yet, if the tape contained inspiring proof of the passenger revolt and its success, it would have been one hell of a lot more consoling than Tom Ridge’s oratory. Why not release it?

Finally, after seven months of political pressure, the FBI allowed United 93 relatives to listen to the CVR. The feds told the families not to reveal what they’d heard. “They said the information on the tapes could be possibly used in the prosecution of [alleged “20th hijacker” Zacarias] Moussaoui, and anything that we say could affect the case in a negative way,” said the brother of one of the victims.

Though they studied the recording, the 9/11 Commission found zero evidence that the passenger revolt succeeded, that they made it into the cockpit and, as Bush claimed, “took the plane into the ground.” Tom Kean & Co. offered only conjecture: “The hijackers remained at the controls but must have judged that the passengers were only seconds from overcoming them.”

“Must have.” At a time when war can be justified by waving around a bottle of fake anthrax on TV, “must have” is judged adequate proof.

Another eyebrow-raising portion of the official account of Flight 93 states that “the passengers and flight crew began a series of calls from GTE airphones and cellular phones” after the hijacking. Ever forgotten to turn off your cellphone during a flight? I have. Try it yourself: Cellular telephone calls tend to drop when you’re driving at 60 miles per hour; passenger jets travel up to ten times that speed. Moreover, there’s zero signal, and thus no ability to place a call, above 8,000 feet. Flight 93, en route from Newark to San Francisco at a cruising altitude of 35,000 feet, dropped 700 feet when it was hijacked at 9:28 am. Cell calls? Not likely.

The Bush Administration has alternately claimed that the White House, then the Capitol, and finally the White House again was the target of the Flight 93 hijackers. Sure, it’s possible that the same terrorists who didn’t know that New Yorkers don’t start work until nine—the World Trade Center was struck at 8:42—wouldn’t have thought to check Bush’s schedule to find out whether he’d be home that morning. But if the White House was the objective, why not hit it first? After all, if Bush had been home when the news from New York first broke, he would have been whisked away to Dick Cheney’s secret undisclosed location. If the government doesn’t know what the target was, they shouldn’t say that they do.

What happened to United 93? There was almost certainly a passenger uprising. Did it succeed? Probably not.

The 9/11 Commission Report says that “at some time between 10:10 and 10:15” Dick Cheney ordered the Air Force to shoot down the plane, which had turned east towards Washington. The plane had already crashed at 10:03. But the regional air traffic control center in Cleveland asked the FAA whether military fighter jets should be dispatched at flight at 9:36, giving the Air Force more than enough time to intercept before the fatal plunge into the field at Shanksville. Was United 93 shot down, despite the official story?

Local media accounts offer some evidence of that possibility. The September 13, 2001 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported, for example: “In a morning briefing, State Police Major Lyle Szupinka confirmed that debris from the plane had turned up in relatively far-flung sites, including the residential area of Indian Lake [two and a half miles from the crash site].”

Flight 93 “headed down…rolled onto its back,” and crashed, leaving a smoldering crater. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette again: “[Indian Lake marina employee John] Fleegle said he climbed on the roof of an abandoned cabin and tossed down a burning seat cushion that had landed there. By Wednesday morning, crash debris began washing ashore at the marina. Fleegle said there was something that looked like a rib bone amid pieces of seats, small chunks of melted plastic and checks.” Seats and bones don’t fly two and a half miles from a crash. Their location could indicate an initial explosion, such as that from a missile hitting a plane.

If the Air Force shot down Flight 93 to protect the capital, it was the only time on 9/11, or since, that the Bush Administration has done something to keep America safe. Whether they were concerned about being second-guessed or for the financial health of the airline industry, we’ll never know. We do know that they’ve become knee-jerk liars, even covering up the rare occasions when they do something right. Perhaps they don’t really know what happened up there. If so, they ought to say that rather than promote more fairy tales about Flight 93.

The passengers did try. The only thing that takes away from their heroism is Bush’s lies. So. Now that Zacarias Moussauoi has been convicted, where’s that tape?


R135427
4 years ago
neverknwo

R135449
4 years ago
whateveryousay

the loizeaux gang aren’t the only explosive demolition company in the game… though it would seem that they wish they were. they like to buy good words from the nova, national geographic, etc.


R135450
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

just watched the patton video and then went on, through pattons recommendation, to watch Waco: The rules of engagement . WOW, the barefaced lies by the officials is legendary.

Yes, legendary in certain circles, that is correct.


R135453
4 years ago
cortez

The quote I recall (am watching it now) is “..there are less than 10 implosion contractors around the world..”

I can’t find anything else on that claim though.

You’re right the Loizeaux Nation Geographic documentary gets ripped apart in this article

..We can only speculate on the answer, and we choose not to, in part because Jack Loizeaux passed away a few years ago. But safe to say this subject is still very sensitive with many older veterans of the blasting industry whom we spoke with while researching this topic. While some dismiss CDI’s “We invented the industry” claim as an arrogant but harmless distortion of history, others deride it as a major ethical breach and an insult to the true blasting pioneers who lost their lives or risked physical harm to learn the lessons the Loizeaux family has so eagerly and publicly taken credit for, and they point to the fact that CDI continues to make their claims as evidence of that dishonesty…


R135454
4 years ago
cortez

How much of the 7 billin cleanup did Controlled Demolition Inc get?

——
Giuliani: Up to one year to clean up World Trade Center mess

By Larry McShane
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

NEW YORK — Cleaning up the estimated 1.2 million tons of rubble left by the destruction of the World Trade Center could take up to a year and cost $7 billion, officials said Friday. The unprecedented work will require the demolition of other damaged buildings and the removal of pieces of the trade center that were hammered into the ground by the force of the falling twin 110-story towers on Sept. 11, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani said. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton estimated that cleanup costs are running $100 million a week. Senate aides put the eventual cleanup cost at $7 billion. Overall, city and federal officials are looking at a total recovery price tag of roughly $39 billion, which includes about $8.2 billion for rebuilding the Trade Center, aides said. But they cautioned that the numbers change frequently; no decision has been made on whether to rebuild. Just 130,000 tons of debris has been removed so far.

Scrap metal diverted?

“The amount of time they need to remove and clear the site will range anywhere from nine months to one year,” Giuliani said before leaving to attend memorial services for four victims. As debris is removed from ground zero, some scrap metal may have been diverted to mob-controlled businesses rather than the Staten Island dump where investigators are examining the rubble for clues and DNA, police said. A grand jury is investigating. As workers continued to whittle away at the staggering piles of debris in lower Manhattan, a city consultant to the cleanup effort said officials are on the verge of announcing “this is not a rescue operation anymore.” Once the rescue workers pull back, heavy-duty excavation equipment will be brought in, said Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition Inc. The remaining workers will be trained to spot human remains and remove them “with the maximum possible dignity,” he said….
Post Modified: 03/12/06 23:50:16

R135459
4 years ago
cortez

Who owned WTC7?

I’m sure there are more people in the know on this but Blackstone owned the mortgage on WTC7? supposedly has links with Kissinger Group,Carlyle & Enron?

BLACKSTONE ACQUIRES DEBT ON 7 WORLD TRADE CENTER

New York, NY October 17, 2000: Blackstone Real Estate Advisors, the global real estate investment and management arm of The Blackstone Group, L.P., announced today that it has purchased, from Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association, the participating mortgage secured by 7 World Trade Center, a commercial office complex controlled by real estate developer Larry Silverstein”

http://www.blackstone.com/news/press_releases%5C7_world_trade_oct_2000.pdf


R135486
4 years ago
whateveryousay

this blackstone?


R135600
4 years ago
YT_

R135606
4 years ago
Merlin

“The structural system was simple and effective. The facades (196ft wide) were to all effects a cage made of steel and prefavbricated sections (in modules measuring 10 × 32 feet), able to resist windinduced and seismic strains without transferring stress to the tower’s core structure, but distributing and absorbing it throughout the outer wall structure. The structures were highly resistant yet light, without internal columns beyond the elevator core.
“Besigned to resist atmosphereic agents, siesmic events and even accidental intrusion (including being hit by an airliner), the Twin Towers were unable to withstand the heat caused by flaming combustion of the 20,000 gallons of jet fuel spilt into each tower on September 11. The heat litterally detached the concrete-chad floors from the towers’ steel core and exterior walls. These, having lost their characteristic resistance and flexibility because of the excessive heat, gave way under the weight of the structure” – Skinner, Peter. World Trade Center, pg 43.

Has anybody actually found the weight of these sections of the exterior and compared them to the 47 core columns? The 9/11 commission says that the exterior bears most of the weight, where “The interior core of the buildings was a hollow steel shaft, in which elevators and stairwells were grouped.”

-Have any calculations taken place to examine how much fuel was actually ignigted on impact, because that fireball, both, were fucking huge.

-The detachment of all the floors seems implausible, insisting that the fuel wrap around to all sides of the building from interior to exterior, all the way down to ground zero.

-I havent heard anyone talk about the explosion seen in the video of when the first (i think) tower collapses, a fireball can be seen….


R135669
4 years ago
reprehensor

Scholars Question Cheney’s Role in 9/11

...“Mineta’s testimony is devastating,” observed James H. Fetzer, Ph.D., McKnight Professor at the University of Minnesota. Fetzer is the founder and co-chair of the scholars’ society, which recently joined with Judicial Watch in calling for release of documents, films and videos, and physical evidence withheld from the public by the administration. “It pulls the plug on the Commission’s contention there was no advance warning that the Pentagon was going to be hit.”

According to Secretary Mineta’s testimony, which is in the public domain, when he (Mineta) arrived at an underground bunker at the White House (known as the Presidential Emergency Operations Center), the Vice President was in charge. “During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon”, he stated, “there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, ‘The plane is 50 miles out.’ ‘The plane is 30 miles out.’

“And when it got down to, ‘The plane is 10 miles out,’” Mineta continued, “the young man also said to the Vice President, ‘Do the orders still stand?’ And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, ‘Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?’” One way to construe these remarks could be that the orders were to shoot down the plane.

The scholars suggest that that is an implausible interpretation. The Pentagon, they observe, may be the most heavily defended building in the world. If the orders had been to “shoot it down,” then no doubt it would have been shot down. Moreover, there would have been no apparent reason for the young man to have expressed concern over whether or not “the orders still stand.” Shooting it down, under the circumstances, would have been the thing to do…

more@link


R135670
4 years ago
cortez

whatever,

that was close,

but the prize goes to YT

enjoy


R135671
4 years ago
cortez

I was reading some tidbits on indymedia, it does look like something worth following up on.

bells and whistles

“As a result, the new owners are not required to make any payments under their lease, but they will be able to collect on the loss of the buildings that collapsed or were otherwise destroyed and damaged in the attacks.”

Ostensibly the ‘owners’ would additionally be the mortgage holders, right? That would be Peter Peterson’s large entirely private investment vehicle Blackstone.

First in power in the Nixon admin, like so many others involved in 9-11 activities, Peter Peterson was was made Chair of the NY Fed. Reserve on Jan. 1. 2000 (the NY Fed is the only one in the ‘faux federal’ system of any massive monetary scale or importance).

His Blackstone corp already fully owns the military contractor TRW, does lots of black ops presumably…

In 2000, Blackstone bought up the WTC7 morgage! It made sure to take the full mortgage instead of all for multiple investors like before. It bought them all out to have the full mortgage on the building.

In 2000, Blackstone invested 25 million dollars in the Bush crime family’s Carlyle Corporation, positioned to become the world’s largest private military contractor after 9-11.

In 2000, Blackstone invested in Aviall, Inc., the world’s largest buyer/seller network corporation of USED AVIATION PARTS.

Peterson’s Blackstone has connections with Kissinger Associates…

An angle worth further investigation…


R135789
4 years ago
YT_

mmmm whiskey


R135798
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

just watched the patton video and then went on, through pattons recommendation, to watch Waco: The rules of engagement . WOW, the barefaced lies by the officials is legendary.

everyone seen the 911 Eyewitness <<<<<<>

I think I will check out that WACO Rules of Engagement.


R135851
4 years ago
cortez

Apparent Molten Iron (Possible Thermite Reaction In Progress) At NE Corner Of WTC 2, Just Prior To Collapse

Apparent Molten Iron Of Possible Thermite Reaction Descending From WTC 2, Moments Prior To Collapse, 9/11/2001

Actual Thermite Reactions In Progress With Generated White Aluminum Oxide Smoke

What can be noted in the following collapse image of WTC 2, is the still glowing droplets of molten metal descending to the ground from it’s previously noted point of origin, possibly the result of a Thermite attack that was underway against the buildings steel. The short lived appearance of this molten metal is noted interestingly, only moments before the collapse of WTC 2 and on the same side of where the building’s collapse ensued, as well. Also, white smoke can be seen bursting from the collapsing structure, nearly adjacent to the point of origin of the afore noted molten metal. This large amount of white smoke may in fact be, accumulated aluminum oxide from within the building, from a large and/or sustained Thermite reaction near the floor from where the structures failure is evident. The building’s base-related white smoke noted earlier and white squibs noted near the end of this examination, may also be the result of accumulated aluminum oxide, possibly resulting from Thermite attacks against the lower core and upper core areas.

WTC 2 Collapse, With White Smoke (Possibly Aluminum Oxide) Exiting Building, 9/11/2001

Falling Core Columns Of WTC 1 Post Collapse, With Possibly White Aluminum Oxide Smoke Streaming From Potentially Still Super-Heated Severed Column Ends, 9/11/2001

All the above from http://www.explosive911analysis.com/

Post Modified: 03/14/06 00:26:29

R135858
4 years ago
CIAlien

That last photo appears to have been manipulated in some way.

Some close-ups to go with the top two:



R135943
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

I guess we should have anticipated touched up photos. The issue is so crucial to understanding JFK, the autopsy photos, plus the Zapruder film. Fortunately, with 911, there are also obvious problems for the story tellers, two of them keep coming up, the ring-penetration mystery at the Pentagon and the second one is the rapid straight-down collapse of Building 7.


R135967
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Zark,

Is the Waco film available other than by torrent?


R135971
4 years ago
neverknwo

Yes.

Which Waco film do you want to see?

The “Rules of Engagement”?

“The Final Prophesy”

or “Waco the Big Lie”

Post Modified: 03/14/06 11:20:28

R135993
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Well I have seen the Big Lie, so either of the other two, but Rules of Engagement first.


R136252
4 years ago
SmallAxe

bump


R136978
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Conspiracy 101 The basics of alternative 9-11 theories

Excerpts

The Pentagon

Some—not all—alternative theorists say the hole in the Pentagon was too small to have been made by a 757, and too deep to have been made by anything but a cruise missile. They also cite the lack of significant wreckage or skid marks near the building. The dearth of surveillance footage of the attack arouses further suspicion. Among the alternate explanations: a truck bomb, a missile, or a drone.

The twin towers

Early on, skeptics raised questions about how two 110-story steel-framed skyscrapers built to withstand airplane impacts not only collapsed, but did so suddenly, totally, and apparently straight down, possibly for the first time in history. The skeptics suggested that the buildings collapsed in a controlled demolition, a theory that has only gained strength in the past four years. The official explanation shifted—first blaming pancaking floor trusses, then warped steel columns transferring weight where it couldn’t be held—and never detailed the exact sequence of the entire collapse. Alternative theorists point to sounds and witnesses’ reports of explosions, little puffs of smoke, steel beams ejected outward, the rapid crumbling of the superstructure, and even the pyroclastic flow of dust as evidence that the buildings had to have been destroyed by explosives. Some theorists also believe the aircraft that hit the buildings were carrying pods on their underbellies and may have fired missiles that account for a bright flash that occurs before the collisions. Others claim the planes were remote controlled, were military aircraft, or did not exist at all.

World Trade Center 7

This building—the last to fall on 9-11—is key to all controlled-demolition theories. Its sudden fall onto its own footprint, and developer Larry Silverstein’s reference on TV to telling the FDNY to “pull it,” are seen as evidence that WTC7 was rigged to fall. Meanwhile, a convincing official explanation hasn’t exactly been forthcoming: FEMA punted on figuring out why building seven, which was not struck by an airplane, collapsed; NIST has postponed its verdict several times. While it might seem odd that the government would destroy a building most people had never heard of, theorists cite the tenants of WTC7 (the SEC, Secret Service, CIA, and Mayor Giuliani’s emergency bunker) as hints of a motive for its demolition. The speculation is that the building was taken out to cover up financial crimes or to destroy the mechanisms of the twin towers’ demise: control boards for the supposed demolition charges or remote-control consoles to guide the airliners to their targets.

Flight 93

The mystery over exactly what happened during the passenger revolt on United Airlines Flight 93 has puzzled even mainstream researchers. Alternative theorists ask different questions. Pointing to press reports filed on 9-11, many suspect that the plane actually landed in Cleveland. Others believe the aircraft was shot down by U.S. military aircraft.

Post Modified: 03/15/06 19:28:21

R137026
4 years ago
CIAlien

911 EYEWITNESS SHOWS AT INTERNATIONAL PRESS CONFERENCE

Is the American Press still Free?

This was the title of a controversial presentation at a prestigious press club in Tokyo, Japan, Tuesday, March 14. The New York Times Tokyo Bureau Chief, Jim Brooks, said that he couldn’t attend an official press function about 9/11 or he would be fired. Coincidentally, the Reuters Bureau chief, Daniel Sloan, was also a strong opponent to the event being held, but he and Brooks were voted down by international members and the event was able to go ahead.

911Eyewitness was screened during dinner for 50 international journalists at the Tokyo, Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan and received tremendous applause.

Was this meeting the reason that the 911 Eyewitness site was hacked? Did this screening for influential journalists trigger a retaliatory attack on the news website?

Are the evildoers getting worried about the scientific analysis of controlled demolition presented in 911Eyewitness?

Could this line of inquiry be the weak link that they have no debunking defense against?

Long-standing FCCJ member Benjamin Fulford, former Tokyo Bureau Chief for Forbes Magazine, chaired the discussion about 9/11 evidence. He talked about his own personal epiphany after researching the evidence available on the net. He challenged the international press to do their own investigations to determine whether the bloggers have scooped the mainstream press on the true story behind the terrorism of Sept. 11, 2001.

Those in attendance were virtually unanimous in agreement that controlled demolition brought down the towers after watching 911Eyewitness.

The lone vocal critic who labeled 911Eyewitness analysis featuring Newton’s Laws of Science as “propaganda” was quickly silenced by additional testimony from ex-MI5 agent David Shayler, stating 9/11 was an inside job, streaming from the internet on Google’s video site.

The evening was a resounding success for 9/11 truth.

Japan is currently buzzing with numerous magazine articles on 9/11 and may prove to be a key ally in the fight for truth. Stay tuned for more.

Note: This morning we got the site operational again after it was brought down by hackers on the 14th. Coincidence that it was not available to the Conference?

911Eyewitness


R137181
4 years ago
SmallAxe

bump


R137797
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

whether the bloggers have scooped the mainstream press on the true story behind the terrorism of Sept. 11, 2001.

Hello. Is there anyone home?


R138932
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

9/11 Truth in the Media

In the past few weeks, 9/11 truth has been squeaking out, to various degrees, through various media sources, suggesting a broader awareness of the need for 9/11 truth and justice is finally reaching mainstream America — a little. Following is a sampling of these.


R139009
4 years ago
neverknwo

Landmark Implosion Looks Like WTC Collapse

Fort Worth tower comes down in implosion
Thousands of Texans braved cold, wet weather to watch the implosion of Landmark Tower. The 30-story building come down without a hitch to make way for a parking lot.

Copyright 2006 Associated Press

Post Modified: 03/20/06 09:52:52

R139107
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Great video of demolition. Schneib, where are you? (The second video has sound and commentary.)


R139225
4 years ago
whateveryousay

The lone vocal critic who labeled 911Eyewitness analysis featuring Newton’s Laws of Science as “propaganda” was quickly silenced

—too bad.

Schneib, where are you?

banned?


R139254
4 years ago
valis

R139269
4 years ago
Continuity

Valis, the most interesting related news links you offered below pertains to Timothy McNiven and his 1976 WTC hijacking wargame. I read about him and his claims a while back. They are amazing and yet quite overlooked.

Since he’s just one guy, without documents or supportive eye-witnesses, it’s tough to go forward with what he’s saying. He could be a key piece of the puzzle or a disinformant. Who knows?

Post Modified: 03/20/06 21:46:12

R139278
4 years ago
Continuity

Actor Charlie Sheen talks with Alex Jones, saying that people in Hollywood are discussing the 9/11 controversies, including the possible demolition of the WTC buildings

“It feels like from the people I talk to in and around my circles, it seems like the worm is turning.”

Transcript. Free audio MP3 at bottom of page.


R139289
4 years ago
cortez

I clocked it at 7-9 seconds from the video..

..Experts figured it would take 13 seconds to bring the Landmark Tower down using 384 pounds of explosives..

Link


R139502
4 years ago
Strangegloved

“9/11 Skeptics Get a Loooong (and surprisingly fair) Treatment in “New York” Magazine”:http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060320164312944


R139594
4 years ago
Continuity

That was an interesting article, Strangegloved, and even entertaining. There were some highlights.

Example excerpt, emphasis mine:

Now the 9/11 Truth movement tells me I saw much more [regrding the collapse of WTC7]. According to Jim Hoffman, a software engineer and physicist from Alameda, California, where he authors the site 911research.wtc7.net, what I saw was a “classic controlled demolition.” This was why, Hoffman contends, 7 WTC dropped so rapidly (in about 6.6 seconds, or almost at the speed of a free-falling object) and so neatly, into its “own footprint.”

For 7 WTC to collapse unaided at that speed, Hoffman says, would mean “ its 58 perimeter columns and 25 central columns of structural steel would have to have been shattered at almost the same instant , so unlikely as to be impossible.”

What happened at 7 WTC might be the key to the entire mystery of September 11, contends Hoffman. The $500 million insurance profit made by Larry Silverstein is a garden-variety motive, but the list of 7 WTC tenants sets conspiracy heads spinning.

To wit: The IRS, the Department of Defense, and the CIA* kept offices on the 25th floor. The Secret Service occupied the ninth and tenth. The Securities and Exchange Commission (home to vast records of bank transactions) was on floors 11 through 13. The 23rd floor was home to Rudy Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management, his crisis center. If this wasn’t enough, the mortgage of 7 WTC was held by the Blackstone Group, headed by Pete Peterson, chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, stalwart players in any NWO MIHOP.

Post Modified: 03/21/06 17:49:42

R139598
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Charlie Sheen does not believe the government theory of 911.

Excerpt

Sheen questioned the plausibility of a fireballs traveling 110 feet down an elevator shaft and causing damage to the lobbies of the towers as seen in video footage, especially when contrasted with eyewitness accounts of bombs and explosions in the basement levels of the buildings.

Post Modified: 03/21/06 18:02:01

R139628
4 years ago
cortez

Speaking of Sheen, I figured there would be a little more initial press than one article in google news, there’s about 40 articles on his divorce alone.

Is it a news blackout as Alex Jones suggests?

Post Modified: 03/21/06 19:46:48

R139646
4 years ago
neverknwo

Paramedic who worked at WTC morgue dies of respiratory illness

NEW YORK (AP) _ A 41-year-old paramedic who worked at a morgue for months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center was buried Monday after dying of an asbestos-related cancer.


R139654
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

That’s too bad. Sorry to read that. Only 41 years old.
How about that picture of Charlie Sheen? Wow.


R139664
4 years ago
cortez

It’s from Being John Malkovich


R139689
4 years ago
Suitcaseman


Carlos Santana Speaks Out Against Bush

They deem Santana’s approach peace, love, flower power, to be harmless stuff, whereas Charlie Sheen is talking facts, and he really knows his stuff. Not harmless plus he is a television star, who just might get through to people. Now, if we could just get Carlos to take off his hat.

Post Modified: 03/21/06 22:15:14

R139699
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

9/11 Truth is Not a Right or Left Issue

Excerpt

The simple facts are that most people who question 9/11 are disgusted with both the democrat and republican parties – as both continue to ignore the questions surrounding 9/11. In fact, a good number of those who question 9/11 are more likely to subscribe to older conservative values which included limiting federal powers, limiting federal spending, and holding government officials accountable for their actions.

Post Modified: 03/21/06 22:45:07

R140065
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Watch TV Tonight (Really!)

March 22, 2006

Mike Berger, Media Coordinator of 911Truth.org, will be featured tonight on CNN Headline News Channel’s Showbiz Tonight, which airs at 7pm Eastern Monday through Friday, and replays at 11pm Eastern.

From their website:
“The 9/11 conspiracy theory. Startling comments by one of the biggest stars on TV about what he thinks really happened on 9/11. “Showbiz Tonight” airs live on Headline News at 7 p.m. and replays at 11 p.m. (All times Eastern.)”

911Truth

The Video courtesy of reprehensor

Post Modified: 03/22/06 21:05:28

R140107
4 years ago
Continuity

Isn’t it obvious that — because he is a bratpack rich Hollywood boy who has had great sex with wicked babes and done a few bad movies to support mortgages and party activities — Charlie Sheen would know absolutely nothing more than a chimp with a Commodore 64 with an internut connection?

Surely, Charlie Sheen is the problem. And those other Communists in Leninwood. WTC7 is not the problem. No, WTC7 was a brave building that stood against massive infernos only until all of its core columns failed virtually at once. WTC7 was so good that it refused to emit fire from 3 of its 4 sides, or even allow its main diesel tank to combust. And when that red-blooded ode to the American Way (or American Express) went down, it went down like an orderly trooper, Baby. Straight down and glowing hot for 2 freaking months like Chernobyl. Now that’s how a patriotic building should conduct itself in the face of existential Muslim whacko adversity.

Fuck ya.


R140138
4 years ago
whateveryousay

fuk-ya


R140181
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

You’re goddamn right. Fucking movie star doesn’t know shit about nothing.

Leave the building alone goddammit.

Post Modified: 03/23/06 07:38:33

R140495
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

R140672
4 years ago
whateveryousay

quote from the propaganda matrix:

On Thursday afternoon is became apparent that Google had enacted a censorship policy…

their source is prisonplanet… who thoughtfully included screenshots:

http://prisonplanet.com/Pictures/mar06/230306google3.jpg
http://prisonplanet.com/Pictures/mar06/230306google.jpg

what a bunch of bullshit!

a big long sentence in quotations (meaning it must be an exact match) returns nothing… big surprise

vs.

3 words
deceptive reactionary conservative fuk-heds from texa$ just trying to scare people and sell them paranoid life-style products…

fuckoff. rtm.

Post Modified: 03/24/06 06:56:00

R140852
4 years ago
Continuity

Damn straight! Burt Reynolds Wrap , Anti-Silverstein crackerjacks!


R140927
4 years ago
neverknwo

I just watched this presentation today and was impressed with his assesment and don’t knwo if anyone else has seen this?

Two presentations, made for theatrical release or TV broadcast, 28+ minutes each
256 accompanying graphics
40 pages of oral histories from New York City Fire-fighters, Police, and Emergency Medical Technicians.
Total time of DVD with Special Features: 78 minutes
Detailed menus in three levels and 60 chapters

genesis
In August 2005 Jim Hoffman and Don Paul recorded presentations for the second convening of the Los Angeles Citizens’ Grand Jury on the Crimes of September 11, 2001. Later they spent many hours with videographer Celestine Star adding photographs, footage, and other graphics to document their assertions. The result is 58 minutes of compelling evidence and analyses.

presentations:

Proving Controlled Demolition of World Trade Center Building 7 and the Twin Towers
Indicting Financiers Behind the Crimes of 9/11/01

special features:

Testimony of New York Fire Department and Emergency Medical Respondents
The Federal Reserve System and the Council on Foreign Relations
First Edition, 2006
Producer: Golden Star Productions
ISBN number: 0-94309605

911 GUILTTHE PROOF IS IN YOUR HANDS

Post Modified: 03/24/06 21:06:44

R141073
4 years ago
neverknwo

R141123
4 years ago
YT_

The construction of the Pentagon began on September 11, 1941.


R141129
4 years ago
neverknwo

R141138
4 years ago
Chickenma1

YT – link, please?


R141139
4 years ago
YT_

It’s common knowledge, check out the wikipedia page on the pentagon.


R141148
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Yes, from a visit DC website, the groundbreaking took place on Sept 11, 1941. BTW, the Neverknwo video above (is that Alex Jones’ voice over?) has the date wrong: It’s 9/11/90, not 9/11/91.


R141162
4 years ago
neverknwo

Yes CK1 it’s a clip from Alex Jones.

I have a different Clip you can watch here that I published

Post Modified: 03/25/06 15:57:49

R141358
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Won’t you join us in taking back our country from the rule of lies?

911Truth.org

Still going strong

Now what about you?

Post Modified: 03/26/06 10:12:49

R141528
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

New Yorkers to Gather at CNN Studios Wednesday

9/11 Truth Seekers To Stage

DEMONSTRATION OF GRATITUDE

Post Modified: 03/26/06 20:49:37

R141556
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

This should finally open the network’s eyes, and the eyes of its viewers, to the need for the airing of much more such information, information which is available. We urge CNN editors to review the “Top 40 Reasons to Doubt the Official Story of 9/11,” on the reverse, and pursue the stories that the mass-audience media have so far failed to cover. (Watch for the publication of the list with full explanations next week at 911Truth.org.) The public has a right to know what lays hidden beneath the facade of the official story on 9/11. Thank you CNN for taking a step in the right direction! Let’s see more 9/11 Truth!

911Truth.org


R141922
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

9-11 Blogger is running Two Commentaries on the Ongoing Zacarias Moussaoui trial

“One of the most obvious lies in the show trial of Zacarias Moussaoui came when a court-appointed physician, Dr. Raymond Patterson, declared Moussaoui was not suffering from mental illness.”

Post Modified: 03/27/06 22:38:32

R142025
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Calling all CIA agents at GNN. Attention, abandon GNN, report to CNN, pay particular attention to Showbiz Tonight. Things are getting out of hand.

The 4TH Night of Showbiz Tonight’s Report on Sheen

Post Modified: 03/28/06 08:32:01

R142232
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

For those, who are going to watch 911 Eyewitness in three parts like they have available here, the part about Building 7 is at 26:14 on Tape 2, which is 33:26 long.

Just as we heard with the towers, we hear the rumbling like a thunderstorm indicating the explosions that occurred just before the collapse of Building 7.

Post Modified: 03/28/06 21:53:14

R142237
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

The Week The Nation Went Down The 9-11 Rabbit Hole

Escerpt

And today, 3/28/06, CNN announced for tonight’s show, “Exclusive: Actor Ed Asner takes on the controversy over Charlie Sheen’s comments about a 9/11 conspiracy theory. (“Showbiz Tonight” airs live on Headline News at 7 p.m. and replays at 11 p.m.Eastern). He will be joined by Sander Hicks, Green Party Candidate for US Senate, to discuss 9/11 and the whistleblowers who tried to stop it.

Post Modified: 03/28/06 22:21:35

R142239
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Propping Up the War on Terror: Lies about the WTC by NIST and Underwriters Laboratories

Excerpt

There was really no need for phony media coverage. As with The 9/11 Commission Report and the lead-up to the Iraq War, the major media simply parroted any explanations, or non-explanations, given in support of the official story. One example is from a television program called “The Anatomy of September 11th,” which aired on the History Channel. Corley took the lead on this one as well, but James Glanz, a New York Times reporter, was also interviewed and helped to spread what is probably the worst excuse for collapse given. He told us that the fires heated the steel columns so much (the video suggested 2500 F) that they were turned into “licorice.” Other self-proclaimed experts have been heard promoting similar theories.9 They will probably come to regret it.

Post Modified: 03/28/06 22:20:57

R142253
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

About 911 Eyewitness

I like what they did with the sound, so that we realize that we are hearing the sounds of explosions, but the sound is taking 9.2 seconds to reach the camera, which is 1.8 miles away, so that the rumbling that we hear is earlier, while the collapse we are watching is exact time.

We see smoke and dust at the base of the North Tower before the collapse , the building starts to collapse and we are still hearing explosions, because the sound is delayed.

It is that same sound each time like a thunderstorm that is close by.


R142262
4 years ago
zark

I had the documentary playing as i was doing the pots and my subwoofer shook, i turned to look at the screen and again the boom boom boom for WTC1 was echoing around my gaff. Then sat and was gob smacked at the footage that i had never seen before with the sound accompanying it.

Particulary welcomed the explanation of the seismic graphs.
..but what the fuck was that report about the hijacked DC police plane (40:40 mins)?

What a documentary, thanks Mr Siegel.


R142333
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Taking a look at Part Two again. Ain’t no mistake about it now. Once you hear that rumbling (that sound of thunder) we know it is coming down. I’m talking about the North Tower.


R142348
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Really, those were great. I’ll even forgive the “you will put your heads down on your desks now, kids, and go to sleep,” voice-over. Not dull, for sure.


R142354
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Building 7 fell 100 meters in 4.5 seconds.

Observation: WTC 7 fell faster than the speed of gravity, equivalent to the speed of a freefall in a vacuum, so we must conclude that a vacuum was created which is characteristic of an implosion, where the structure is pulled down by a controlled demolition.

Supporting evidence:Debris fell neatly within the footprint of the building, an eyewitness heard a loud clap of thunder and saw a shockwave rip through the building, causing windows to blast out before the ground floor exploded, and a second later the building came down. Rick’s tape recorded a large explosion 9 and a half seconds before any signs of collapse were visible.

911 Eyewitness 3 at the 13 minute mark

Post Modified: 03/29/06 09:46:22

R142442
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

You have to check out the free fall experiment around the 10 minute mark on Tape 3, 911 Eyewitness. 100 meters represents the space between the 47th floor and the 21st floor, or 328 feet. It would take slightly over 5 seconds for a long flat steel beam to travel 100 meters.


R142516
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

At 12:23 of Tape 3, 911 Eyewitness, these words are on the screen. The narrator reads them.

Observation: WTC 7 fell faster than the speed of gravity, equivalent to the speed of a free fall in a vacuum.

Conclusion: A vacuum was created characteristic of an implosion, where the structure is “pulled” down by a controlled demolition.

Supporting Evidence: 1. Debris fell neatly within the footprint of the building. 2. An eyewitness heard a loud “clap of thunder” and saw a “shockwave” rip through the building, blowing out all the windows, before the ground floor exploded and a second later the building came down. 3. Rick’s tape recorded a large explosion 9.5 seconds before any signs of collapse were visible.

Post Modified: 03/29/06 18:22:52

R142553
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Recording of Today’s Dr. Griffin Appearance on Guns and Butter – Audio Download

This is a must listen, because they talk about the 500 dramatic testimonies of the firemen and emergency workers, which were ordered by the outgoing head of the New York Fire Commission, and were recorded in December 2001 and January 2002, so that memories were still pretty fresh. He wanted to preserve the accounts before they were reshaped by collective memory.

Explosive Testimony: Revelations about the Twin Towers in the 9/11 Oral Histories

Post Modified: 03/29/06 22:13:40

R142782
4 years ago
CIAlien

Your link doesn’t go directly to the audio file of the show – located here.
It’s a great interview with Dr. Griffin, focusing on the towers.


R142833
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Nice CIAlien. I tell you what, as Mariano Rivera likes to say, Mr. Griffin has absolutely no doubts about what happened at the WTC complex on 911.

Buildings 1 & 2 taken down from the top to fit the official story, and Building 7 from the bottom. He said none of the facts support the official story, but all of the facts support controlled demolition. Opportunity to plant charges, no problem, Bush family connection to the security company and the power downs and more are enough for Griffin. The man has turned the corner. Don’t let him wave goodbye.

You got to go back a few months in this thread to find my conversation with shogo about the explosions several people saw that went all the way around the buildings.

Post Modified: 03/30/06 07:18:16

R143152
4 years ago
CIAlien

Propping Up the War on Terror:
Lies about the WTC by NIST and Underwriters Laboratories

March 28, 2006

“Already there is near-consensus as to the sequence of events that led to the collapse of the World Trade Center.”—Shankar Nair, as quoted in the Chicago Tribune, September 19, 2001

Turn on C-Span, or “Meet The Press,” or any other media program presenting federal officials. Whatever the issue, it always comes back to the same thing. Our government really has nothing else to offer us but protection from another 9/11. It uses this painful story to cut public services, eliminate our basic rights, and plunder the national coffers. But for many of us, it is not entirely clear from whom we most need protection.1 As our debt explodes and our freedoms diminish, it would be wise to maintain focus on the origins of our War on Terror. No matter where this war leads us, we will need to keep the beginning in mind if we ever hope to see an end.

The Point of Origin: The Collapse of the WTC

Many have found that the 9/11 Commission not only failed to help us understand what happened; it also omitted or distorted most of the facts.2 But if we really want to zero in on the exact turning point around which we plunged into chaos, we need to focus in particular on the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings. This is where our hearts were wrenched and our minds were made ready for never-ending war, torture, and apparently the end of everything that was American. If we are ever to emerge from this insanity, we need to know how three tall buildings collapsed due to fire, all on the same day, when no such thing has ever happened before.

The Twin Towers and Why They Fell

It would help to begin with an accurate description of the WTC towers in terms of quality of design and construction. In July of 1971, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) presented a national award judging the buildings to be “the engineering project that demonstrates the greatest engineering skills and represents the greatest contribution to engineering progress and mankind.“3 Others noted that “the World Trade Center towers would have an inherent capacity to resist unforeseen calamities.” This capacity stemmed from the use of special high-strength steels. In particular, the perimeter columns were designed with tremendous reserve strength whereby “live loads on these columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs.“4

One would expect that any explanation for the destruction of such buildings would need to be very solid as well. Four years after 9/11, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) finally did give us their version of “why and how” two of the buildings collapsed, but its explanation may be even less effective than the 9/11 Commission report.5 Now that the official story has been given, however, we can see just how weak and ill-defined our basis for this War on Terror has been all along. Additionally, we can track the evolution of official comments about collapse and see who was involved.

Selling the Official Story: Some Key Players

Shankar Nair, whose statement quoted above is quite telling, was one of those “experts” on whom the government depended to support what turned out to be an ever-changing, but always flimsy, story. Many of the scientists involved in the investigation were asked to examine ancillary issues, like escape routes and other emergency response factors. But those few who attempted to explain what really needed explaining, the unique events of fire-induced collapse, appear to have engaged in what can only be called anti-science. That is, they started with their conclusions and worked backward to some “leading hypotheses.”

Not surprisingly, many of the contractors who contributed to the NIST investigation, like the company for which Nair works, just happen to depend on good relationships with the government in order to earn their living. What may be a surprise is just how lucrative these relationships can be. For example, Nair’s company, Teng & Associates, boasts of Indefinite Quantity Contracts, long-term relationships with federal government agencies, and federal projects worth in excess of $40 million.6

Others who worked so hard to maintain the official story included Gene Corley, a concrete construction expert listed by the National Directory of Expert Witnesses as a source for litigation testimony.7 Corley was more than just a witness, however. He had led the Oklahoma City bombing investigation and then was asked to lead the initial ASCE investigation into the WTC disaster. Perhaps someone else, with less experience in bombings and more experience in fires, would have been a better choice. But without authority to save samples or even obtain blueprints, the ASCE investigation was ineffective anyway. Corley himself ended up being a very versatile resource, however, providing testimony supporting the pre-determined conclusions many times, and even posing as a reporter during an NIST media session.8

There was really no need for phony media coverage. As with The 9/11 Commission Report and the lead-up to the Iraq War, the major media simply parroted any explanations, or non-explanations, given in support of the official story. One example is from a television program called “The Anatomy of September 11th,” which aired on the History Channel. Corley took the lead on this one as well, but James Glanz, a New York Times reporter, was also interviewed and helped to spread what is probably the worst excuse for collapse given. He told us that the fires heated the steel columns so much (the video suggested 2500 F) that they were turned into “licorice.” Other self-proclaimed experts have been heard promoting similar theories.9 They will probably come to regret it.

This is because the results of physical tests performed by NIST’s own Frank Gayle proved this theory to be a ridiculous exaggeration, as some people already knew. The temperatures seen by the few steel samples saved, only about 500 F, were far too low to soften, let alone melt, even un-fireproofed steel. Of course that result could have been calculated, knowing that 4,000 gallons of jet fuel10 —-not 24,000 gallons or 10,000 gallons, as some reports have claimed—-were sprayed into an open-air environment over several floors, each comprised of more than 1,000 metric tons of concrete and steel.

Another expert who served on NIST’s advisory committee was Charles Thornton, of the engineering firm Thornton and Tomasetti. Thornton’s partner, Richard Tomasetti, was reported to be behind the unprecedented and widely criticized decision to destroy most of the steel evidence.11 Early on Thornton said: “Karl, we all know what caused the collapse.” He was talking to Karl Koch, whose company erected the WTC steel. Koch attempted to clarify as follows. “I could see it in my mind’s eye: The fire burned until the steel was weakened and the floors above collapsed, starting a chain reaction of gravity, floor falling upon floor upon floor, clunk – clunk – clunk, the load gaining weight and momentum by the nanosecond, unstoppable. Once enough floors collapsed, the exterior walls and the core columns were no longer laterally supported and folded in.“12 This is a description of what was called the Pancake Theory, the most widely accepted version of what happened.

The Pancake Theory was promoted by an influential 2002 NOVA video called “Why the Towers Fell,” in which Corley (yet again) and Thornton were the primary commentators. Both of them talked about the floors collapsing, and Thornton described how the perimeter columns buckled outward, not inward as Koch had described. The video made a number of false claims, including exaggeration of the temperatures (2000 F), remarks about melting steel, and the incredible statement that two-thirds of the columns in WTC1 (the North Tower) were completely severed. NIST’s report now indicates that only about 14% of the columns in WTC1 were severed, and in some photos we can count most of these for ourselves.13

NIST and Underwriters Laboratories

In August 2004, Underwriters Laboratories evaluated the Pancake Theory by testing models of the floor assemblies used in the WTC buildings. Despite all the previous expert testimony, the floor models did not collapse. NIST reported this in its October 2004 update, in a table of results that clearly showed that the floors did not fail and that, therefore, pancaking was not possible.14 NIST more succinctly stated this again in its June 2005 draft report, saying: “The results established that this type of assembly was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing, for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11th.“15

At the time of the floor tests, I worked for Underwriters Laboratories (UL). I was very interested in the progress of these tests, having already asked some sensitive questions. My interest began when UL’s CEO, Loring Knoblauch, a very experienced executive with a law degree from Harvard, surprised us at the company’s South Bend location, just a few weeks after 9/11, by saying that UL had certified the steel used in the WTC buildings. Knoblauch told us that we should all be proud that the buildings had stood for so long under such intense conditions. In retrospect it is clear that all of us, including Knoblauch, were ignorant of many important facts surrounding 9/11 and did not, therefore, see his statements as particularly important.

Over the next two years, however, I learned more about the issues, like the unprecedented destruction of the steel evidence and the fact that no tall steel-frame buildings have ever collapsed due to fire. And I saw video of the owner of the buildings, stating publicly that he and the fire department made the decision to “pull”—-that is, to demolish—-WTC7 that day,16 even though demolition requires many weeks of planning and preparation. Perhaps most compelling for me were the words of a genuine expert on the WTC. This was John Skilling, the structural engineer responsible for designing the towers.17 (The NOVA video, incidentally, gave this credit to Leslie Robertson. But Robertson, who never claimed to have originated the design, was only a junior member of the firm [Worthington, Skilling, Helle and Jackson], and Skilling was known at the time to be the engineer in charge.) In 1993, five years before his death, Skilling said that he had performed an analysis on jet plane crashes and the ensuing fires and that “the building structure would still be there.“18

By 2003, all of this information was available to anyone who cared. The details were, without a doubt, difficult to reconcile with testimony from officials, reporters, and scientists who were supporting the official story. But in November of that year, I felt that answers from UL were needed. If, as our CEO had suggested, our company had tested samples of steel components and listed the results in the UL Fire Resistance Directory almost forty years ago, Mr. Skilling would have depended on these results to ensure that the buildings were sufficiently fire resistant. So I sent a formal written message to our chief executive, outlining my thoughts and asking what he was doing to protect our reputation.

Knoblauch’s written response contained several points. He wrote: “We test to the code requirements, and the steel clearly met those requirements and exceeded them.” He pointed to the NYC code used at the time of the WTC construction, which required fire resistance times of 3 hours for building columns, and 2 hours for floors. From the start, his answers were not helping to explain fire-induced collapse in 56 minutes (the time it took WTC2, the South Tower, to come down). But he did give a better explanation of UL’s involvement in testing the WTC steel, even talking about the quality of the sample and how well it did. “We tested the steel with all the required fireproofing on,” he wrote, “and it did beautifully.“19

This response was copied to several UL executives, including Tom Chapin, the manager of UL’s Fire Protection division. Chapin reminded me that UL was the “leader in fire research testing,” but he clearly did not want to make any commitments on the issue. He talked about the floor assemblies, how these had not been UL tested, and he made the misleading claim that UL does not certify structural steel. But even an introductory textbook lists UL as one of the few important organizations supporting codes and specifications because they “produce a Fire Resistance Index with hourly ratings for beams, columns, floors, roofs, walls and partitions tested in accordance with ASTM Standard E119.“20 He went on to clarify that UL tests assemblies of which steel is a component. This is a bit like saying “we don’t crash test the car door, we crash test the whole car.” In any case, Chapin suggested that we be patient and wait for the report from NIST, because the investigation into the “collapse of WTC buildings 1, 2, and 7” was an ongoing process and that “UL is right in the middle of these activities.“21

For the most part, I did wait, although I shared my concerns with Chapin again at UL’s Leadership Summit in January 2004. I encouraged him to ask for a company news release on our position, but this did not happen and I never heard from him again. By the time UL tested the floor assembly models in August of that year, I had been promoted to the top management job in my division, Environmental Health Laboratories, overseeing all company functions. Two months later, NIST released an official update that included the floor test results, as well as Frank Gayle’s results, in which steel temperatures were predicted. These results clearly invalidated the major theories of collapse, because pancaking could not occur without floor collapse and steel does not turn to licorice at the temperatures discussed.

After reviewing this update, I sent a letter directly to Dr. Gayle at NIST. In this letter, I referred to my experiences at UL and asked for more information on the WTC investigation and NIST’s soon-to-be-published conclusions. NIST had planned at the time to release its final report in December, with time allowed for public comment. After I allowed my letter to become public,22 this date was moved to January 2005, and then nothing was heard from NIST for several months.

Other than UL’s involvement in testing the steel components, the facts I stated had all been reported publicly, but when I put them together plainly, they were considered outrageous. Five days after I sent my letter, I was fired by UL for doing so. The company made a few brief statements in an attempt to discredit me, then quickly began to make it clear that its relationship with the government, perhaps due to its tax-exempt status, was more important than its commitment to public safety.

For example, in spite of Tom Chapin’s previous statements, UL suggested that it had played only a “limited” role in the investigation. Despite what our CEO, Loring Knoblauch, had written and copied to several executives, UL said there was “no evidence” that any firm had tested the steel used in the WTC buildings.23 In doing so, UL implied that its CEO not only had fabricated this story about testing the WTC steel but had also spoken and written about it for several years without anyone in the company correcting him. As I see it, the only other option was that the company claiming to be our “Public Safety Guardian” was lying to us about the most important safety issue of our lives.

My experiences give a taste for the delicate nature of our critical turning point. But to keep our focus, we should examine what NIST did with the results of its physical tests, which had failed to support its conclusions. Did NIST perform more tests, at least to prove its key argument that much of the fireproofing on the steel in the Twin Towers popped off due to the impact of the airliners? No, it did not. Instead, NIST put together a black box computer model that would spit out the right answers. This black box model was driven by initial parameters that could be tweaked. When the parameters that had initially been considered “realistic” did not generate results that “compared to observed events,” NIST scientists performed their final analysis using another set of parameters they called “more severe.“24 When they were finished, their model produced video graphics that would enable anyone to see the buildings collapse without having to follow a train of logic to get there.

Tom Chapin of UL was one of those doomed to make public comments in support of NIST’s final report. His comments were innocuous enough but he did hint at something of value. “The effect of scale of test assemblies…,” Chapin said, “requires more investigation.“25 This may be the closest thing to a straightforward statement that we will ever see from UL on the matter. But it seems clear enough that results showing zero floor collapse, when scaled-up from the floor panels to a few floors, would still result in zero floor collapse. Perhaps a more direct version of Chapin’s comment might be that test results negating predetermined conclusions should not be used to prove them.

Other than the video, NIST left us with only some vague statements about a few sagging floors suddenly destroying two hundred super-strong perimeter columns and forty core columns. But since sagging floors do not weigh more than non-sagging floors, it is difficult to see how this might occur, especially so uniformly. NIST claimed the perimeter columns saw increased loads of between 0 and 25% due to the damage, but it never reconciled this with the original claim that these columns could resist 2000% increases in live load. And the outward-buckling theory, suggested by Thornton, was changed again to inward buckling—-apparently the forces involved were never well defined. Additionally, NIST suggested that the documents that would support testing of the steel components, along with documents containing Skilling’s jet-fuel-fire analysis, could not be found.26

Ultimately, NIST failed to give any explanation for the dynamics of the towers as they fell, about how and why they dropped like rocks in free-fall. For both buildings, NIST simply stated that “once the upper building section began to move downwards . . ., global collapse ensued,” as if just saying so was enough.27 As for WTC7, NIST as of yet has not elaborated on its “working collapse hypothesis,” which was vaguely presented in June 2004.28 The bottom line is that, after more than four years, it is still impossible for the government even to begin to explain the primary events that drive this War on Terrorism.

So much has been sacrificed, and so much has been invested in this story, that we all have a need for supportive answers. But when we look for those answers, all our “mind’s eye” can see is this smoky black box, where scientific results are reversed to support politically correct, pre-determined conclusions. That critical point of divergence, where our lives were turned upside down and all logic followed, has always been too painful to imagine. But now, without expert accounts of pancaking floors and licorice steel, it cannot be imagined at all.

Some of us remain hopeful that we can still achieve a critical mass awareness of the need for truth, and in doing so pull the support out from under what John McMurtry calls “the 9/11 Wars.“29 But if we cannot, even as the hopes for peace fade and the number of 9/11 families continues to grow, we should remember how we got this story and how it was propped up despite all the evidence against it. Because whatever happens next, after the smoke clears, our children may have a need to know.

——————

NOTES

[1] Richard Heinberg, “Götterdämmerung,” Museletter, No.144, March 2004 (http://www.museletter.com/archive/144.html).

[2] David Ray Griffin, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions (Northampton: Interlink Books, 2005). Griffin summarizes the omissions and distortions in “The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie,” 911 Visibility Project, May 22, 2005 (http://www.septembereleventh.org/newsarchive/2005-05-22-571pglie.php).

[3] Angus K. Gillespie, Twin Towers: The Life of New York City’s World Trade Center (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press 1999), 117.

[4] “How Columns Will Be Designed for 110-Story Buildings,” Engineering News-Record, April 2, 1964: 48-49.

[5] Jim Hoffman, “Building a Better Mirage: NIST’s 3-Year $20,000,000 Cover-Up of the Crime of the Century,” 911Research.wtc7.net, December 8, 2005 (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/index.html).

[6] Website for Teng & Associates (http://www.teng.com/teng2k3/mainframe.asp).

[7] Website for National Directory of Expert Witnesses (http://national-experts.com/members2/witness.asp?d_memnum=07572&d_lnum=2).

[8] Archived webcast video of NIST press briefing, NIST News Release website, June 23, 2005 (http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_briefing_june2305.htm), 01:15:10.

[9] Sheila Barter, “How the World Trade Center Fell,” BBC News, September 13, 2001 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1540044.stm).

[10] Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA), “World Trade Center Building Performance Study,” May 2005, Chapter 2.

[11] James Glanz and Eric Lipton, City in the Sky: The Rise and Fall of the World Trade Center (New York: Times Books, 2003), 330.

[12] Karl Koch III with Richard Firstman, Men of Steel: The Story of the Family that Built the World Trade Center (New York: Crown Publishers, 2002), 365.

[13] Eric Hufschmid, Painful Questions: An Analysis of the September 11th Attack (Goleta, Calif.: Endpoint Software, 2002), 27.

[14] Table of results from Underwriters Laboratories August 2004 floor model tests, as presented by NIST in October 2004 (http://wtc.nist.gov/media/P6StandardFireTestsforWeb.pdf), 25.

[15] NIST, Final Report of the National Construction Safety Team on the Collapses of the World Trade Center Towers(Draft) (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1draft.pdf), 195.

[16] Silverstein’s statement is contained in “America Rebuilds,” PBS documentary, 2002 (www.pbs.org/americarebuilds). It can be viewed (www.infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV) or heard on audio file (http://VestigialConscience.com/PullIt.mp3).

[17] “Structures Can Be Beautiful, World’s Tallest Buildings Pose Esthetic and Structural Challenge to John Skilling,” Engineering News-Record, April 2, 1964: 124.

[18] Glanz and Lipton, City in the Sky, 138.

[19] Underwriters Laboratories email correspondence, December 1, 2003.

[20] Samuel H. Marcus, Basics of Structural Steel (Reston, Va.: Reston Publishing 1977), 20.

[21] Underwriters Laboratories email correspondence, December 1, 2003.

[22] Kevin Ryan, “The Collapse of the WTC,” 911 Visibility Project, November 11, 2004 (http://www.septembereleventh.org/newsarchive/2004-11-11-ryan.php).

[23] John Dobberstein, “Area Man Stirs Debate on WTC Collapse,” South Bend Tribune, November 22, 2004 (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041124095100856).

[24] NIST, Final Report, 196.

[25] Comments from Underwriters Laboratories on NIST WTC report, NIST website (http://wtc.nist.gov/comments/ULI_Ganesh_Rao_8-5-05.pdf).

[26] Archived webcast video of NIST press briefing, NIST News Release website, June 23, 2005 (http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_briefing_june2305.htm), 01:18:50.

[27] NIST, Final Report, 197.

[28] NIST presentation on WTC7 collapse investigation, NIST website (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/June2004WTC7StructuralFire&CollapseAnalysisPrint.pdf).

[29] John McMurtry, “9/11 and the 9/11 Wars: Understanding the Supreme Crimes.” In David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott, eds., 9/11 and the American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out (Northampton: Interlink Books, 2006). My present essay will also appear in this volume.

911truth.org


R143290
4 years ago
CIAlien

Dr. Griffin spoke to a standing room only crowd tonight at the Grand Theater in Oakland, California and received a standing ovation.

David Ray Griffin at the Grand Lake Theater mp3

Also today, the San Francisco Chronicle did a piece on Dr. Griffin:

AN INSIDE JOB?
Theologian scoffed at 9/11 conspiracy theories, then looked closer

San Francisco Chronicle


R144160
4 years ago
cortez

THE MYTH OF ‘IMPLOSION’

Over the past several decades, the word ‘implosion’ has been used to describe almost every type of explosive demolition project. Whether due to convenience, or to the absence of any word that accurately describes this type of activity, ‘building implosion’ has been the title given to thousands of projects involving explosives.

DID YOU KNOW that only a small percentage of explosive demolition jobs are true ‘building implosions’?

Webster’s Dictionary defines implosion as “a violent collapse inward”. In the demolition industry, a blaster is usually trying to pull a structure away from adjacent exposures and towards an area large enough to contain the debris. Therefore, the only time a building is truly ‘imploded’ is when exposures (other structures or areas of concern) completely surround it. When this situation exists, the blaster has no choice; he must make the building collapse in on itself. This is by far the trickiest type of explosive demolition project, and there are only a handful of blasting companies in the world that possess enough experience—and insurance—to perform these true building implosions.


NOT AN IMPLOSION
Building dropped into an adjacent parking lot


A REAL IMPLOSION
Structures, underground utilites and city streets on all 4 sides

&

DUST IN THE WIND

When the excitement of the blast is over, a large, billowing cloud of dust is one of the most identifiable characteristics of a successful project.

DID YOU KNOW that according to most experts, that dust cloud actually makes explosive demolition more neighbor-friendly than a conventional demolition project?
Think about it: When buildings are brought down conventionally (by wrecking ball and other heavy equipment), they release dust particles into the air every day—in every direction—for several consecutive months. Using the explosive demolition method, these dust particles are released at one predefined time, in one direction. This gives neighboring businesses, as well as local residents with existing health problems, a way to avoid or prepare for the dust with minimal inconvenience. The result is a safer project all the way around; fewer man-hours spent in a dangerous, unstable building, and less public exposure to the inevitable by-product of any demolition job—dust.

Link

Post Modified: 04/03/06 15:28:46

R144910
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

CIAlien,

A couple of days before you posted that article I put up a link to it, because I like to check 911 Truth for the latest news and post it here, with this excerpt

There was really no need for phony media coverage. As with The 9/11 Commission Report and the lead-up to the Iraq War, the major media simply parroted any explanations, or non-explanations, given in support of the official story. One example is from a television program called “The Anatomy of September 11th,” which aired on the History Channel. Corley took the lead on this one as well, but James Glanz, a New York Times reporter, was also interviewed and helped to spread what is probably the worst excuse for collapse given. He told us that the fires heated the steel columns so much (the video suggested 2500 F) that they were turned into “licorice.” Other self-proclaimed experts have been heard promoting similar theories.9 They will probably come to regret it.

But I am glad you posted it, because I finally read the entire article. In other words they found out they never proved anything and covered it up.


R144919
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Carlson on 9/11 Truth — Again…

Excerpt

Tucker Carlson made a name for himself writing for the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard, which is edited by William Kristol. It is interesting to note that immediately preceding Dr. Jones’ appearance on Mr. Carlson’s show William Kristol appeared as a guest. William Kristol, for those of us who may have been living in a plastic bubble for the last fiveyears, happens to be chairman of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), along with the likes of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Pearl and at least six other members of the Bush administration on the morning of 9/11. PNAC, of course, called for the transformation of American policy in the late 20th century stating:

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor.”

Post Modified: 04/04/06 22:46:47

R146029
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

9/11: The Myth and the Reality

NOTE: This lecture was delivered March 30, 2006, at Grand Lake Theater in Oakland for Progressive Democrats of the East Bay. Abbreviated versions of it were given in San Francisco for the Democratic World Federalists on April 2 and the Commonwealth Club on April 3.


R146034
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

9/11: The Myth and the Reality, Conclusion

Excerpt

Conclusion

It would seem, for many reasons, that the official story of 9/11, which has served as a religious Myth in the intervening years, is a myth in the pejorative sense of a story that does not correspond to reality. One sign of a story that is a myth in this sense, I have pointed out, is that it cannot be rationally defended, and the official story has never been publicly defended against informed criticism by any member of NIST, the 9/11 Commission, or the Bush administration. An illustration: After Charlie Sheen had made public his skepticism about the official story, CNN’s “Showbiz Tonight” wanted to have a debate, about the points he had raised, between a representative of the government and a representative of 9/11Truth.org. But the producers reportedly could find no member of the government willing to appear on the show. In this unwillingness of the government to appear on an entertainment show to answer questions raised by an actor, we would seem to have the clearest possible sign that the government’s story is myth, not reality.

If so, we must demand that the government immediately cease implementing the policies that have been justified by this myth.

Post Modified: 04/07/06 19:55:32

R146035
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Massaoui Judge Grants 9/11 Families Access to Documents

ALEXANDRIA, Virginia (CNN) — The judge in the Zacarias Moussaoui trial ruled Friday that families of September 11 attack victims are entitled to the same unclassified aviation security documents the government turned over to the al Qaeda conspirator’s defense team.

“I’ve always been troubled to the extent which our government keeps things secret from the American people,” U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said, granting the families’ request after a hearing.

“It is amazing what some agencies think is secret,” Brinkema added. “As a culture, we need to be careful not to be so wrapped up in secrecy that we lose track of our core values and laws.”

Her order, issued over the objection of government lawyers, allows attorneys for 9/11 families to obtain copies of documents related to pre-September 11 aviation security once the Moussaoui trial ends.

The cache has thousands of pages, well beyond the documents introduced as evidence to the Moussaoui jury.


R146037
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Judge Blasts Government Secrecy – CNN

Congress gave 9/11 families rights Brinkema agreed, saying, “I would think what Congress had in mind, when they passed this legislation, was concern that these people have a right to pursue their rights as victims to see whether there was sufficient negligence or culpability.”

The families’ request was triggered by the revelation early in the Moussaoui trial that Transportation Security Administration lawyer Carla Martin had improperly coached TSA witnesses once the trial began.

According to testimony and court documents, Martin used e-mail to send them transcripts and commentary despite a court order shielding witnesses from the proceedings.

Martin’s e-mail chain also revealed she had been communicating with airline attorneys. The 9/11 families questioned the ties between the airlines and the agency.

Motley told Brinkema that TSA officials “try to throw a wet blanket over everything.” Brinkema said she suspected the TSA has been overly cautious.

“It’s quite extraordinary that the TSA has a tougher policy on discovery than the CIA, the FBI and the NSA,” she said. “What puts the TSA in a higher category to own information than these agencies?”

Motley told the judge: “I know the TSA believes they are the CIA, but they are not.”

Court-appointed Moussaoui defense attorney Edward MacMahon bristled at potentially being “a discovery vehicle for civil plaintiffs somewhere,” while Moussaoui prosecutor Robert Spencer said he worried Brinkema was taking a “broad leap” to grant plaintiffs access to information disclosed in criminal cases.

Government lawyer Beth Goldman said the TSA has valid concerns about “inadvertent” disclosures that could fall into terrorists’ hands.

Brinkema’s order puts the burden on the government to turn over unclassified aviation security documents that already have been separated into classified and unclassified piles for the Moussaoui case.

The process won’t begin until the Moussaoui jury returns its death penalty verdict.

“I don’t see what the harm or difficulty or danger is for the government,” the judge said. “I frankly cannot see what the problem, other than logistics, would be.”

Post Modified: 04/07/06 20:05:48

R146256
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

9/11 – Bank Buys Broker for CONCEALED DEMOLITION

In an open letter from David Hawkins to the London Market insurance brokers committee the cause for murder and fraud is laid out for the Trade Center destruction. As the onslaught of information about the destruction of the three towers on Sept. 11, 2001 the idea that the government is complicit becomes more apparent.

Excerpt

Bcc

Date of sending: April 3, 2006

Dear Mr. Hough

Re: 9/11 – Bank Buys Broker for Concealed Demolition

In my e-mail to you titled, “Citigroup-AMEC 9/11 insurance fraud on Lloyd’s of London?”, I suggested that “Lloyd’s convert its civil action in respect of alleged negligence by Citigroup-AMEC [in an alleged diesel-fueled fire leading to the destruction of WTC#7] into a RICO* suit in respect of apparent racketeering [including solicitation to murder], extortion, arson and insurance frauds ..”
(Full text of letter at www.st911.org/ some excerpts below)

RICO* – Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization

We remind you that Lloyd’s et al. have sued Citigroup-AMEC et al. in respect of the destruction of WTC#7 which with WTC#1 and 2, became the first three steel-framed buildings in history to collapse through fire on 9/11.

One of the directors of Citigroup is the disgraced former director of the C.I.A., John Deutch. Mr. Deutch is a director of Raytheon where he helped to destroy ‘Able Danger’ counter-intelligence data-mining evidence pointing at Mohammed Atta’s and the other al-Qaeda cells in America a year before 9/11.

Post Modified: 04/08/06 13:12:55

R146366
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

This myth was reinforced by The 9/11 Commission Report. While explaining why al-Qaeda had ample motives for carrying out the attacks, this report mentions no motives that US leaders might have had. But the alleged motive of al-Qaeda—-that it hated Americans and their freedoms—-is dwarfed by a motive held by many members of the Bush-Cheney administration: the dream of establishing a global Pax Americana, the first all-inclusive empire in history.

This dream had been articulated by many neoconservatives, or neocons, throughout the 1990s, after the disintegration of the Soviet Union made it seem possible. It was first officially articulated in the Defense Planning Guidance of 1992, drafted by Paul Wolfowitz on behalf of then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney—-a document that has been called “a blueprint for permanent American global hegemony“10 and Cheney’s “Plan . . . to rule the world.“11

Achieving this goal would require four things. One of these was getting control of the world’s oil, especially in Central Asia and the Middle East, and the Bush-Cheney administration came to power with plans already made to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. A second requirement was a technological transformation of the military, in which fighting from space would become central. A third requirement was an enormous increase in military spending, to pay for these new wars and for weaponizing space. A fourth need was to modify the doctrine of preemptive attack, so that America would be able to attack other countries even if they posed no imminent threat.

These four elements would, moreover, require a fifth: an event that would make the American people ready to accept these imperialistic policies. As Zbigniew Brzezinski explained in his 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard, the American people, with their democratic instincts, are reluctant to authorize the money and human sacrifices necessary for “imperial mobilization,” and this refusal “limits . . . America’s . . . capacity for military intimidation.“12 But this impediment could be overcome if there were “a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat“13 —-just as the American people were willing to enter World War II only after “the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.“15 This same idea was suggested in 2000 in a document entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses, which was put out by a neocon think tank called the Project for the New American Century, many members of which—-including Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz—-became central members of the Bush administration. This document, referring to the goal of transforming the military, said that this “process of transformation . . . is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—-like a new Pearl Harbor.“15

When the attacks of 9/11 occurred, they were treated like a new Pearl Harbor. Several members of the Bush administration spoke of 9/11 as providing opportunities. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said that 9/11 created “the kind of opportunities that World War II offered, to refashion the world.“16 It created, in particular, the opportunity to attack Afghanistan and Iraq; to increase the military budget enormously; to go forward with military transformation; and to turn the new idea of preemptive warfare into official doctrine. This doctrinal change was announced in the 2002 version of the National Security Strategy, which said that America will “act against . . . emerging threats before they are fully formed.“17

So, not only did the Bush administration reap huge benefits from 9/11. These were benefits that it had desired in advance. The idea that it would have had no motives for orchestrating 9/11 is a myth. But there is one more myth that keeps many people from looking at the evidence.

““the kind of opportunities that World War II offered, to refashion the world.”

You fuckwit do you think they would talk openly about that if you trying to create pearl harbor all over again.


R146368
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

“Another element of the official story about the alleged hijackers is that they were very devout Muslims. The 9/11 Commission Report said that Atta had become very religious, even “fanatically so.“25 The public was thereby led to believe that these men would have had no problem going on this suicide mission, because they were ready to meet their maker. Investigative reporter Daniel Hopsicker, however, discovered that Atta loved cocaine, alcohol, gambling, pork, and lap dances.26 Several of the other alleged hijackers, the Wall Street Journal reported, had similar tastes.27 The Commission pretends, however, that none of this information was available. While admitting that Atta met other members of al-Qaeda in Las Vegas shortly before 9/11, it says that it saw “no credible evidence explaining why, on this occasion and others, the operatives flew to or met in Las Vegas.“28

What the hell does that prove against 9/11. This argument is so fucking worthless. How could anyone be able to suspend logic and think this in any way proves that 9/11 was a conspiracy.


R146369
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

“This idea is widely believed. But it is undermined by much evidence. The United States, like many other countries, has often used deceit to begin wars—-for example, the Mexican-American war, with its false claim that Mexico had “shed American blood on the American soil,“4 the Spanish-American war, with its “Remember the Maine” hoax,5 the war in the Philippines, with its false claim that the Filipinos fired first,6 and the Vietnam war, with its Tonkin Gulf hoax.7 The United States has also sometimes organized false flag terrorist attacks—-killing innocent civilians, then blaming the attacks on an enemy country or group, often by planting evidence. We have even done this in allied countries. As Daniele Ganser has shown in his recent book NATO’s Secret Armies, NATO, guided by the CIA and the Pentagon, arranged many such attacks in Western European countries during the Cold War. These attacks were successfully blamed on Communists and other leftists to discredit them in the eyes of the voting public.8

Finally, in case it be thought that US military leaders would not orchestrate such attacks against US citizens, one needs only to read the plan known as Operations Northwoods, which the Joint Chiefs of Staff worked up in 1962, shortly after Fidel Castro had overthrown the pro-American dictator Batista. This plan contained various “pretexts which would provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba.” American citizens would have been killed in some of them, such as a “Remember the Maine” incident, in which: “We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantánamo Bay and blame Cuba.“9

Great, citing 40-60 year old events during a massive war and the cold war is in no way evidence. A = B doesn’t equal C.


R146370
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

“Also, the Pentagon is surely the best defended building on the planet.90 It is not only within the P-56-A restricted air space that extends 17 miles in all directions from the Washington Monument, but also within P-56-B, the three-mile ultra-restricted zone above the White House, the Capitol, and the Pentagon. The Pentagon is only a few miles from Andrews Air Force Base, which has at least three squadrons with fighter jets on alert at all times. (The claim by The 9/11 Commission Report that no fighters were on alert the morning of 9/11 is wholly implausible, as I have explained in my critique of this report.91) The Pentagon, moreover, is reportedly protected by batteries of surface-to-air missiles, so if any aircraft without a US military transponder were to enter the Pentagon’s airspace, it would be shot down.92 Even if the aircraft that hit the Pentagon had been Flight 77, therefore, it could have succeeded only because officials in the Pentagon turned off its missiles as well as ordering the fighters from Andrews to stand down.

Wow that’s really convincing. Oh wait, It doesn’t make any sense. Why would they attack the pentagon, AKA themselves if they were already killing enough people to get a national response. How can you believe this garbage? It is no longer often contradicted by facts, it doesn’t make a bit of sense.


R146371
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

“But the flight manifests that have been released contain neither the names of the alleged hijackers nor any other Arab names.”

You’re only reading the initially reported ones. This is pathetic. You don’t bother to fact-check any of this. Why do you think they would leave off the names of the highjackers if they were trying to convice us that they were highjacked?

Seriously, this shit is so retarded it isn’t even funny.


R146373
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

“Second, total collapses of steel-frame high-rise buildings have never—-either before or after 9/11—-been brought about by fire alone, or fire combined with externally produced structural damage”

Yeah, they also weren’t in a building filled with highly explosive dust from the tower collapses or have massive >100 buildings collapse right next to them. This is an amazingly dumb comparison.

If you are actually conviced by this article Suitcaseman that the government had a massive secret conspiracy to kill thousands of americans for foreign policy reasons, you’re too stupid for me to even bother talking to.


R146376
4 years ago
YT_

You are so dumb it’s painful.


R146391
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

Wook mommy, a cuwt wittle trwoll! Can I touch it? Can I? Oh, funny little troll is blabbering…what a cutie!


R146393
4 years ago
YT_

If you get any weaker I’m going to have to call an ambulance…


R146396
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

ho ho the wittwo twoll is blabbering! Hoh it’s so cute! May it’ll tell us about how he’s an expert on demolision or air flight! hoho! I don’t think I understand his funny joke though..


R146572
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

senssensibilityr,

Since you like to quote Shogo, “this shit is so retarded it isn’t even funny”, I guess you should know that apparently he has changed his mind on the controlled demolitions issue. Check this thread you will find this Shogo statement.

These newly released eye-witness accounts are pretty compelling however, and would seem to suggest a much smaller demolitions project (i.e. wiring the supports only in the basement of the building, which would seem more doable by a small number of people, and possibly more concealable). I won’t say I’m convinced, but I do think these make for a stronger argument that there may have been explosives helping the collapses to happen.

At least I think that is what I read. It is interesting, because it took him a few months to come around. We started talking about firemen and emergency workers and their statements in 2005.

Another thing, you are putting up quotes from David Ray Griffin, so I guess you should contact him if you disagree with him. I use the 911 Forum as a bulletin board often, and I put articles from 911 Truth and 911 Blogger to keep people, who are interested, informed of the latest developments. I did not write the articles.

Post Modified: 04/09/06 18:52:09

R146584
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Thomas Kean, 9/11 Chairman, Gets Confronted

Excerpt

The press conference before the speech was turned out to be a great opportunity, because literally half of the questions were hostile, and I was able to ask Mr. Kean a question about why the 9/11 Commission, on page 172 of their report, stated that the question of who bankrolled the September 11th attacks was “of little practical significance.” He replied that the job cost so little money and that it was too hard to trace. So I got from Mr. Kean an admission that following the money trail in a crime that took the lives of 3000 people was “of little practical significance” because it only cost about $166 per murder and was too much of a bother to pursue. This was an astonishing red flag screaming “cover-up”.

Post Modified: 04/09/06 18:57:24

R146588
4 years ago
lday

“Your honour,
permission to treat the stormfronter trolls as hostile?”


R147120
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Physicist Says Heat Substance Felled WTC

Deseret Morning News
Monday, April 10, 2006
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635198488,00.html

Extremely hot fires caused structures to fail, BYU expert says

By Suzanne Dean
For the Deseret Morning News

EPHRAIM — A Brigham Young University physicist said he now believes an incendiary substance called thermite, bolstered by sulfur, was used to generate exceptionally hot fires at the World Trade Center on 9/11, causing the structural steel to fail and the buildings to collapse.

“It looks like thermite with sulfur added, which really is a very clever idea,” Steven Jones, professor of physics at BYU, told a meeting of the Utah Academy of Science, Arts and Letters at Snow College Friday.

The government requires standard explosives to contain tag elements enabling them to be traced back to their manufacturers. But no tags are required in aluminum and iron oxide, the materials used to make thermite, he said. Nor, he said, are tags required in sulfur.

Jones is co-chairman, with James H. Fetzer, a distinguished professor of philosophy at the University of Minnesota of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a group of college faculty members who believe conspirators other than pilots of the planes were directly involved in bringing down New York’s Trade Towers.

The group, which Jones said has 200 members, maintains a Web site at www.st911.org. A 40-page paper by Jones, along with other peer-reviewed and non-reviewed academic papers, are posted on the site.

Last year, Jones presented various arguments for his theory that explosives or incendiary devices were planted in the Trade Towers, and in WTC 7, a smaller building in the Trade Center complex, and that those materials, not planes crashing into the buildings, caused the buildings to collapse.

At that time, he mentioned thermite as the possible explosive or incendiary agent. But Friday, he said he is increasingly convinced that thermite and sulfur were the root causes of the 9/11 disaster.

He told college professors and graduate students from throughout Utah gathered for the academy meeting that while almost no fire, even one ignited by jet fuel, can cause structural steel to fail, the combination of thermite and sulfur “slices through steel like a hot knife through butter.”

He ticked off several pieces of evidence for his thermite fire theory:

First, he said, video showed a yellow, molten substance splashing off the side of the south Trade Tower about 50 minutes after an airplane hit it and a few minutes before it collapsed. Government investigators ruled out the possibility of melting steel being the source of the material because of the unlikelihood of steel melting. The investigators said the molten material must have been aluminum from the plane.

But, said Jones, molten aluminum is silvery. It never turns yellow. The substance observed in the videos “just isn’t aluminum,” he said. But, he said, thermite can cause steel to melt and become yellowish.

Second, he cited video pictures showing white ash rising from the south tower near the dripping, liquefied metal. When thermite burns, Jones said, it releases aluminum-oxide ash. The presence of both yellow-white molten iron and aluminum oxide ash “are signature characteristics of a thermite reaction,” he said.

Another item of evidence, Jones said, is the fact that sulfur traces were found in structural steel recovered from the Trade Towers. Jones quoted the New York Times as saying sulfidization in the recovered steel was “perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the (official) investigation.” But, he said, sulfidization fits the theory that sulfur was combined with thermite to make the thermite burn even hotter than it ordinarily would.

Jones said a piece of building wreckage had a gray substance on the outside that at one point had obviously been a dripping molten metal or liquid. He said that after thermite turns steel or iron into a molten form, and the metal hardens, it is gray.

He added that pools of molten metal were found beneath both trade towers and the 47-story WTC 7. That fact, he said, was never discussed in official investigation reports.

And even though WTC 7 was not connected to the Trade Towers — in fact, there was another building between it and the towers —and even though it was never hit by a plane, it collapsed. That suggests, he said, that it came down because a thermite fire caused its structural steel to fail.

Jones said his studies are confined to physical causes of the collapses, and he doesn’t like to speculate about who might have entered the buildings and placed thermite and sulfur. But he said 10 to 20 people “in the know,” plus other people who didn’t know what they were doing but did what they were told, could have placed incendiary packages over several weeks.

© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company

————————————————————————————————————————

Post Modified: 04/11/06 08:24:56

R147888
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Retired USAF Colonel on 9-11

No, this is not Lt. Colonel Robert Bowman. This is yet one more retired Air Force colonel, who is speaking out about 911, and he has some pretty interesting experience. His name is George Nelson and he has 34 years of Air Force experience, and he is a trained aircraft accident investigator. In the next to last paragraph, Nelson recommends three websites for 911 researchers, although he said there are many credible sites.

This is what he had to say.

I’m George Nelson; I served four years of enlisted service, and 30 additional years as a commissioned officer in the Air Force—— Please, let me begin by saying, that I get no pleasure or personal satisfaction whatsoever from speaking out in opposition to the US government’s official conclusions, and the 911 Commission’s official report of the tragedy that occurred on September 11th, 2001.

I’m a trained aircraft accident investigator. I completed the University of Southern California’s accident investigation course in 1989. I was an aircraft maintenance manager throughout my military career and was assigned additional duties as a member of accident investigations for the Air Force. In every case of an aircraft loss, an accident investigation was always conducted and a report was issued through command channels, and it made no difference if the loss was due to an obvious accident or if it had been shot down by enemy fire. An investigation was always conducted, and a report was always filed, even if the plane was under 5,000 feet of water and not recoverable.

In the case of all four reported aircraft losses on 9-11, each one was reported to have been carrying commercial passengers aboard scheduled commercial airliners. Federal Aviation regulations in Part 121, governs the operations of all scheduled airlines that operate inside the United States, including foreign airlines, which transit through our airports in commercial operations. In the case of each aircraft loss that occurred on 9-11, the regulations are very clear and unambiguous— investigations were required, and the reports would have covered the loss circumstances in excruciating detail, including all collateral damage incurred. Especially in the cases of such horrendous loss of life, collection of physical evidence would have been paramount in determining the precise causes of each loss. Scientific and reasoned deductions are permitted only after an exhaustive search and analysis of physical evidence has been completed. Hundreds of parts from each of those four aircraft are critical for safety of flight, and as such, must be meticulously controlled by only one-of-a-kind, dedicated, serial numbers. These parts are required by FAA regulations to be tracked and removed and replaced at a designated number of flying hours or a number of actual cycles. Just like the toughness of black boxes, these components are virtually indestructible and relatively easy to find among the crash wreckage. Each of the aircraft would have two engines that are nine feet in diameter, and would have had many of the critical, serialized parts installed. Several sets of massive landing gears would have been easy to find and identify, and each of these parts would have been linked to one, and only one aircraft in the world. The aircraft parts from the two World Trade Center buildings, the Pentagon and the hole in the ground at Shanksville, Pennsylvania would have disclosed the specific identity of each aircraft, and those parts did not “vaporize” as some Pentagon spokespersons have reported. The parts may have since “vaporized” but not during the reported crashes. The well-known “Black Boxes” were reported to have been found, but were immediately confiscated and seem to have since, disappeared.

Independent news photographers and investigators at Shanksville, Pennsylvania were kept far away from the reported aircraft crash site by security cordons and guards. The public could only view the crash site by an aerial photo. The photo shows an impact area only 20 feet long by 10 feet wide, and the photo shows no sign of crash wreckage inside the small area. Most small fighter planes create larger holes than that, and again, no aircraft accident report has been made public. This only serves to heighten the public’s growing skepticism of the 911 Commission report.

And then we have the reported crash of a Boeing 757 with a 125-foot wingspan that was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon. It made a 16-foot diameter hole in the building at ground floor, and penetrated three inner rings of the building and left an almost perfect circular hole as it exited the third inner ring of the building. If an aluminum Boeing 757 had struck that fortified building, there would have been more aluminum on the ground outside than what went inside, yet there was little visible evidence of an airplane crash on the outside. What physical evidence that could have been of some value, was immediately carted away under cover. And once again, there’s the annoying problem of the missing Black Boxes.

In the interest of time, I’m going to relate just one more piece of key evidence. The aircraft that was reported in the government’s official story to have crashed into the south tower was United Airlines, Flight 175 carrying 65 passengers, including the crew and five highjackers. One of the television news cameras captured the Boeing 767, just as it was banking into a left turn, seconds before striking the building. Underneath the fuselage, installed across the starboard aircraft wing root, is a visible, large piece of equipment that most viewers have called a “Pod”. Many have speculated what purpose the “Pod” might have served on a passenger carrying, scheduled airliner, but such speculation is pointless at the present time. The fact is, that such extraneous equipment would have never have been installed on a Part 121, scheduled airliner in the first place. Every piece of equipment proposed for use on an aircraft after its production must be issued a Supplemental Type Certificate by the FAA prior to installation. No record of an STC was found that would authorize such external equipment to be used on a Part 121, Boeing 767 airliner. This leads to a more disturbing speculation, that the airplane seen hitting the south tower was not UAL flight 175, but a plane that had been substituted for flight 175.

The National Transportation Safety Board decides which of three organizations will take the lead role in Part 121 accident investigations. Sometimes the NTSB will assume the lead, and in some cases they will assign lead responsibility to the FAA, but most always if criminal foul play is suspected, the lead role will be assigned to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with the technical assistance of both the FAA and NTSB. It’s fair to say, in this case that the NTSB suspected criminal foul play on 9-11, so which agency had primary responsibility for the investigations and required reporting? Where are the reports? Where is the physical evidence to back up those reports? Does anyone recall TWA Flight 800 that was bound from the US to Paris about four years ago? The FBI was assigned the lead role, suggesting that foul play was suspected, and the FBI gave almost daily reports on the evening news channels, but ultimately the FBI’s conclusion was, that a spark in one of the internal fuel tanks caused the fatal explosion. At least we all knew in that case, there was an investigation conducted, such as it was.

I could go on and on with the many weaknesses in the 9-11 Commission’s report, but there’s little reason to belabor the details, so I’d like to offer just two or three websites where anyone who’s the least bit interested can find most every weakness in the 9-11 Commission report. In these few minutes we’ve just begun to scratch the surface. For further information, we suggest you research the following websites for yourself, but there are many more credible sources available. Check out—- www.st911.org; www.physics911.net or the website edited by the couple sitting to my left; www.wingtv.net/.

I’m frequently asked by people hearing me speak about9-11, “Why in the world are you speaking out about this tragedy? Doesn’t it worry you?” I answer the same way every time I’m asked——- “Because I’m a man with a conscience. You can see by my age that I must have grand children, and I do. I’m about to turn this country that I deeply love, over to my children and my grand children. And as I look around, I don’t like what I see happening to it.

Thanks for listening.

Post Modified: 04/12/06 19:41:28

R147900
4 years ago
whateveryousay

re: the latest s.jones stuff,

check greening’s latest update on 911myths: http://911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf

he says the orange metal pouring out of the corner of the south tower in the video could have been indeed steel and could have been melted due to the airliner’s large oxygen cylinder rupturing and feeding the fire. not beyond the realm of imagination.
it’s just a few paragraphs added to the end of the paper and he unfortunately hasn’t revised the beginning of his paper where he asserts the dripping metal must be molten aluminum… it’s perhaps a fair assumption, initially, because his sources don’t comment on the colour of the dripping metal; but since his sources would certainly be reporting the same thing as witnessed in the more recently discovered video… well, by the end of the paper he’s saying it’s steel melting and at the start he’s saying aluminum.


R147901
4 years ago
whateveryousay

“Underneath the fuselage, installed across the starboard aircraft wing root, is a visible, large piece of equipment that most viewers have called a “Pod”” —George Nelson

...uh


R147915
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

You had to bring that up didn’t you, well let’s not let it sit there by itself, here is what Nelson said about the possibility that what people are looking at is a pod,

Many have speculated what purpose the “Pod” might have served on a passenger carrying, scheduled airliner, but such speculation is pointless at the present time. The fact is, that such extraneous equipment would have never have been installed on a Part 121, scheduled airliner in the first place. Every piece of equipment proposed for use on an aircraft after its production must be issued a Supplemental Type Certificate by the FAA prior to installation. No record of an STC was found that would authorize such external equipment to be used on a Part 121, Boeing 767 airliner. This leads to a more disturbing speculation, that the airplane seen hitting the south tower was not UAL flight 175, but a plane that had been substituted for flight 175.


R148283
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVES IN THE SOUTH WTC TOWER COLLAPSE.

What really bought down the towers?
Friday, Dec. 13, 2002 at 5:49 PM

This Article Claims Evidence of Explosives In The South Tower Collapse. What do you think?

Post Modified: 04/13/06 22:33:25

R148476
4 years ago
neverknwo

Then I saw another angel in mid-heaven (airplane?) with an eternal gospel to proclaim to those who dwell on earth, to every nation and tribe and tongue and people; and said with load voice, *Fear God and give him Glory, for the hour of judgement has come; and worship him who made heaven and earth…................

Rev 14:6-7

And another angel(airplane?), a second, followed, saying, Fallen (*WTC1*), fallen (*WTC2*) is Babylon the
great, she(Statue of Liberty) who made all the nations drink the wine of her impure passion.

Rev. 14:8


R148547
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

What inspired you, Good Friday?


R150811
4 years ago
2pacalypse

We can’t possibly allow this thread to die.


R150819
4 years ago
YT_

It can’t die, it’s undead.


R150823
4 years ago
sisyphus

it all makes sense after that last neverknwo post


R150826
4 years ago
YT_

wyrd


R150871
4 years ago
whateveryousay

it all makes sense after that last neverknwo post -sis

that’s kind of insulting…

but about bombs and such,

here’s some airtraffic control regarding “flight 93” :

===================================================

United 93: [unintelligible] this is captain, please sit down, remain sitting, we have a bomb on board.

...

controller: Do you see any, ah, activity on your right side, smoke or anything like that?

American 1060: Negative. We’re searching [two second pause]. Yeah, we do have a smoke puff now at about, er, oh probably two o’clock. There appears to be just a spire up like a puff of black smoke.

===================================================

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/flight93-air-traffic.wma

source: http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/flight93-air-traffic.htm

so, they say they have a bomb on board but then you have black smoke coming out of the plane, maybe it’s true.. there are indications that the aircraft blew up in the air.

and of course, if there was a bomb on 1 of 4 planes, why not the other 3?

Post Modified: 04/20/06 05:57:02

R151222
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Researcher probes for answers to Sept. 11 attack on Pentagon

April 20, 2006
By Buzzy Hassrick

When the Sept. 11 terror attacks occurred, Russell Pickering was working as a professional firefighter in Seattle.

Especially because of his profession, he was deeply affected.

“The loss of firefighters and police was significant to me because of what I did,” he recalled.

His initial interest devolved into probing questions and eventually frustration that the federal government seemed unwilling to provide answers. From a network of contacts and information, Pickering has created a Web site about the attack on the Pentagon, www.pentagonresearch.com.

People should look at the evidence there and make up their own minds, he say s.

“I don’t make any conclusions,” Pickering adds. “I have no partisan interest in this.”

His curiosity was piqued when friends who served on Seattle’s urban search and rescue team returned from a Sept. 11 assignment in New York City, bringing questions about what they’d seen. They wondered why World Trade Center building 7 had seemingly collapsed for no reason.

Another factor was an article in the 105-year-old Fire Engineering magazine in which the editor expressed outrage that debris was removed without investigating why the buildings had collapsed. The writer also questioned the handling of the investigation.

Also puzzling Pickering were reports by NYC firefighters about secondary explosions in the two towers. When 9-1-1 transcripts were released in 2005 they contained accounts of those explosions.

The evidence gave credibility to the questioners who continued their probe. And it provided additional incentive for Pickering to question the events of Sept. 11.

“I feel it’s my patriotic duty to look into it and find out what we’re not being told,” he says. “We all have a right to know what happened.”

He served in the Air Force for six years and is respectful of the military.

In his examination of photographs from the attack on the Pentagon, Pickering says he’s found only a few images showing parts of the aircraft. Further, the FBI refuses to release evidence of aircraft debris and barred the National Transportation and Safety Board from investigating the scene.

The FBI also has 85 videos it refuses to release. One of Pickering’s research partners filed a Freedom of Information Act request for them. He says the agency at first denied the existence of the videos and then, on appeal, admitted to having 85.

The videos come from civilian, business and security cameras in the vicinity of the Pentagon, says Pickering, who wonders why the agency won’t share the information.

“There is no justification for not releasing it,” he says, adding that anyone can go to the Pentagon’s Web site and get all the details about the building. “There’s absolutely no security issue whatsoever.”

Questions about the plane persist, such as why the official passenger manifest contained neither Arab names nor names that aren’t accounted for, Pickering says. Further, the government has no positive identification of the five hijackers and barred involvement by the Virginia medical examiner.

Also barred from the site were members of the American Society of Civil Engineers, who based their subsequent report on indirect examinations, he adds.

Pickering is further puzzled by the history of the terrorist-pilot, who was denied access to a Cessna 172 three weeks before Sept. 11. Since the denial was based on his inadequate English and piloting skills, Pickering wonders how he could fly a jumbo jet.

“There may be answers for these things, but the government hasn’t put forth a single piece of evidence,” Pickering says. “I don’t think we were told the whole truth.

“As an American citizen, I’m entitled to answers.”

His quest has become a “personal passion,” says Pickering, who moved to Cody four years ago and spent more than a year researching before launching his Web site. That site now is getting more than 15,000 hits a month, he adds.

“It’s a duty to pursue this until answers are provided,” he says.

His sources include interviews with fire officials from the scene, an individual with a nine-minute video of the incident and other eyewitnesses. He’s also studied photographs and videos, searched the Internet and submitted FOIA requests.

“Whenever possible, I’ve gone to the source,” Pickering says.

He’s also consulting on a movie, “Loose Change 2nd Edition.” The movie is promoted at www.loosechange911.com as showing a “direct connection between the attacks of Sept. 11 and the U.S. governoment.”

Pickering’s resolve was recently buoyed by wide interest in an Internet radio show in which he participated. Along with tens of thousands of Internet viewers, he says 30 federal agencies and military-industrial companies logged into the program.

“If we didn’t have something important, they wouldn’t be interested,” Pickering says.

        • *

R151278
4 years ago
whateveryousay

you know there was an article about building 7 which made a couple of good points…

on the assumption that the whole thing was an inside job, they speculate that bldg7 must have been wired to implode at the time of the north-tower collapse.. would seem much more plausible and there’d be a big dust cloud from the north-tower..

(kind of looks like building 6 (between 7wtc and north-tower) was wired with bombs in the roof for some reason and they went off at the time of the northtower collapse)

..the story would go that something went wrong with tower7’s self-destructo mechanism and it took them until 5 in the afternoon to fix it and drop the building into a neat little pile with as little damage as possible to the neighbours property. in the meantime the SEC was torched just in case and a few other floors (apparently including the indestructible OEM bunker’s floor).

i’ve seen speculation that a flight93 could have been intended to be involved too. who knows.


R151330
4 years ago
reprehensor

R151463
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Without the Truth There Can Be No Justice

V.Z. Lawton is a survivor of the Alfred P. Murrah Building bombing in Oklahoma City, April 19, 1995. He has been an advocate for truth and accountability regarding the federal government’s mishandling and cover-up of the OKC case in which 168 people died, including 58 of his friends and fellow employees in the Department of Housing And Urban Development.

I recently watched Fox News Studio “B” coverage of the Carli Jane Brucia murder case in which the judge read the facts of the case in the pre-sentencing phase of the trial. Among other important details, the judge spoke of the video cameras as being crucial to the prosecution of the lone perpetrator of her abduction, rape, and murder. The film from the cameras in the carwash was used to convict the guilty party, Joseph Smith, and to give him the death penalty. As I watched this 1½ hour program hosted by Shepard Smith, I thought how often videos are used to convict perpetrators. Sometimes a videotape is shown on the nightly news or even all over the country before a trial begins. How wonderful it would be if a federal judge would require the Justice Department to release the surveillance video from the cameras that were on the front of the Oklahoma City Federal Building and other locations in and around Oklahoma City.

You see, I, along with a number other individuals, have been fighting for the release of those surveillance tapes for eight years. We are certain the film would show the other perpetrators of the bombing that killed 168 people which included 19 children under six years of age and caused terrible life-changing injuries to six more children that survived.

Most people don’t know about this alarming aspect of the Oklahoma City case. So far, 24 surveillance videos have been grudgingly admitted to in federal court as a result of a stalled FOI lawsuit. (We have since found out there are more.) The U.S. Justice Department has been fighting the release of any and all videos for over six years.

So what is the problem with letting the American people see these videos? Is there something to hide? All federal and state trials are over and the government has long ago admitted that the investigation is over. One hundred sixty-eight people died in the OKC case. One might argue that is 167 more reasons to release the videos compared to a case such as the Brucia case. That is not to belittle in any way the taking of the life of the beautiful little girl, Carli Brucia. Instead, it focuses the importance of forcing the government agencies that are responsible for stonewalling and coming clean with what is on those tapes.

The government has claimed that McVeigh was solely responsible for driving the Ryder truck into OKC and parking it in front of the Murrah Building. But from eyewitness reports we know that McVeigh exited the driver’s side of the truck and a second passenger (JD #2) left the passenger side of the truck, walked to the rear of the truck, and back again to the front of it. This John Doe then crossed 5th Street and got into a brown Chevy pickup truck with two more John Doe’s. McVeigh continued north across 5th Street, got into his yellow Mercury where a 4th JD had parked it and was waiting for McVeigh. The two of them sped out of the parking lot almost hitting another witness and drove east on the alley between 5th and 6th Streets, across Robinson Street to the north-south alley that is called Wall Street on OKC maps. There they traveled south on Wall St. crossing NW 5th St., then NW 4th ST. stopping in an alley next to the Southwestern Bell Telephone Building. At this location they watched the building blow up. This was confirmed by yet another survivor who was stopped by McVeigh as she was walking south from 5th Street. McVeigh asked her if she was in the building when it blew up and she said she was. When he asked if many people were killed, she replied that there were probably many casualties. I later talked to this woman about her confrontation with McVeigh and asked if there was anyone else with him. She said there was but indicated that she didn’t get a good look at him. She added, “I just knew they were together.”

Besides McVeigh there were at least four other John Does who participated in the bombing: a) The JD in the Ryder truck with McVeigh (1), b) the two JD’s in the brown Chevy pickup with McVeigh (2 & 3) and, c) the JD in the Mercury (4). All four of these participants are still walking the streets breathing free air. Why haven’t they been caught?

The many witnesses (over 20) who saw McVeigh with others were interviewed by the FBI and Justice Department and were led to believe they would be called to testify in the federal trials of McVeigh and Nichols. Of course they never were – much like the video tapes – never to be heard of again.

Going back to the link between the video footage in the Carli Brucia case and the subsequent apprehension and conviction of her murderer, the camera was the key to the identification of the killer and was instrumental in obtaining his conviction. Since the use of cameras were so helpful it made me wonder why our investigative agencies had not used them in the pursuit of all those involved in the Murrah Building bombing. There is something about the lack of use of these videos that makes a prudent man wonder why pictures of the four people seen in these videos were not released to the public. Just like the release of the video pictures of Carli Brucia’s killer were what identified him and led law officers to his apprehension, there is reason to believe that the video footage from the Murrah Building cameras would have been instrumental in bringing all those responsible to justice. Since that has not been done and they have fought so hard against it, it leads to questions such as: 1) Is there a reason some in our government do not want these people apprehended? If so, what is the reason? 2) Was it a sting operation by the BATF that went awry? 3) Who are these four individuals that the law enforcement agencies of our federal government may be protecting?

There are many other questions as well. One has to do with the Ryder truck and damage to the building. The morning of the bombing, I was on the 8th floor in the HUD office signing some papers when I felt the building start shaking. Then the lights went out, debris began falling on my desk, and then something hit me in the back of the head rendering me unconscious. I never heard the truck bomb explode which indicates that the building was coming down demolition style just seconds before the truck bomb exploded.

Numerous experts with impeccable credentials from the military and private sector have done in-depth analysis and have concluded that additional explosives were placed inside the building to supplement the truck bomb. Who put the explosive devices in the building to cause this? Another very unusual and questionable aspect to the government’s investigation has to do with the many fingerprints collected, a total of 1,034. An FBI crime lab agent testified that he was ordered to not run a check of the fingerprints against the FBI’s multi-million database of fingerprints. Why? What could possibly justify these actions?

I lost 58 friends in the building that day and the bombers also attempted to murder me. I believe that is reason enough for me to pursue everyone who was involved in the bombing. I want justice but there can be no justice without the truth. It is time for the government to release the videos and then we can identify, pursue, and capture these four co-conspirators that have never been held accountable for their degree of participation in the Murrah Building bombing on April 19, 1995. Almost 11 years have passed with these four individuals still free men. It is time for justice to prevail over what appears to be a government cover-up.

VZ Lawton April 11, 2006

Post Modified: 04/21/06 14:22:03

R152920
4 years ago
Continuity

^^^^


R153078
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Researcher probes for answers to Sept. 11 attack on Pentagon

April 20, 2006
By Buzzy Hassrick

When the Sept. 11 terror attacks occurred, Russell Pickering was working as a professional firefighter in Seattle.

Especially because of his profession, he was deeply affected.

“The loss of firefighters and police was significant to me because of what I did,” he recalled.

His initial interest devolved into probing questions and eventually frustration that the federal government seemed unwilling to provide answers. From a network of contacts and information, Pickering has created a Web site about the attack on the Pentagon, www.pentagonresearch.com.

People should look at the evidence there and make up their own minds, he say s.

“I don’t make any conclusions,” Pickering adds. “I have no partisan interest in this.”

His curiosity was piqued when friends who served on Seattle’s urban search and rescue team returned from a Sept. 11 assignment in New York City, bringing questions about what they’d seen. They wondered why World Trade Center building 7 had seemingly collapsed for no reason.

Another factor was an article in the 105-year-old Fire Engineering magazine in which the editor expressed outrage that debris was removed without investigating why the buildings had collapsed. The writer also questioned the handling of the investigation.

Also puzzling Pickering were reports by NYC firefighters about secondary explosions in the two towers. When 9-1-1 transcripts were released in 2005 they contained accounts of those explosions.

The evidence gave credibility to the questioners who continued their probe. And it provided additional incentive for Pickering to question the events of Sept. 11.

“I feel it’s my patriotic duty to look into it and find out what we’re not being told,” he says. “We all have a right to know what happened.”

He served in the Air Force for six years and is respectful of the military.

In his examination of photographs from the attack on the Pentagon, Pickering says he’s found only a few images showing parts of the aircraft. Further, the FBI refuses to release evidence of aircraft debris and barred the National Transportation and Safety Board from investigating the scene.

The FBI also has 85 videos it refuses to release. One of Pickering’s research partners filed a Freedom of Information Act request for them. He says the agency at first denied the existence of the videos and then, on appeal, admitted to having 85.

The videos come from civilian, business and security cameras in the vicinity of the Pentagon, says Pickering, who wonders why the agency won’t share the information.

“There is no justification for not releasing it,” he says, adding that anyone can go to the Pentagon’s Web site and get all the details about the building. “There’s absolutely no security issue whatsoever.”

Questions about the plane persist, such as why the official passenger manifest contained neither Arab names nor names that aren’t accounted for, Pickering says. Further, the government has no positive identification of the five hijackers and barred involvement by the Virginia medical examiner.

Also barred from the site were members of the American Society of Civil Engineers, who based their subsequent report on indirect examinations, he adds.

Pickering is further puzzled by the history of the terrorist-pilot, who was denied access to a Cessna 172 three weeks before Sept. 11. Since the denial was based on his inadequate English and piloting skills, Pickering wonders how he could fly a jumbo jet.

“There may be answers for these things, but the government hasn’t put forth a single piece of evidence,” Pickering says. “I don’t think we were told the whole truth.

“As an American citizen, I’m entitled to answers.”

His quest has become a “personal passion,” says Pickering, who moved to Cody four years ago and spent more than a year researching before launching his Web site. That site now is getting more than 15,000 hits a month, he adds.

“It’s a duty to pursue this until answers are provided,” he says.

His sources include interviews with fire officials from the scene, an individual with a nine-minute video of the incident and other eyewitnesses. He’s also studied photographs and videos, searched the Internet and submitted FOIA requests.

“Whenever possible, I’ve gone to the source,” Pickering says.

He’s also consulting on a movie, “Loose Change 2nd Edition.” The movie is promoted at www.loosechange911.com as showing a “direct connection between the attacks of Sept. 11 and the U.S. governoment.”

Pickering’s resolve was recently buoyed by wide interest in an Internet radio show in which he participated. Along with tens of thousands of Internet viewers, he says 30 federal agencies and military-industrial companies logged into the program.

“If we didn’t have something important, they wouldn’t be interested,” Pickering says.

Researcher probes for answers to Sept. 11 attack on Pentagon

Post Modified: 04/24/06 23:44:15

R153601
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Recent 9/11 Videos Recap

Three videos available at 911 Blogger to watch

1. September 11 Revisited
Were explosives used to bring down the buildings?

2. Evidence to the Contrary

3. What’s the Truth?

Post Modified: 04/25/06 23:02:09

R153620
4 years ago
zark

also

911 Eyewitness – Bittorrent

911 Eyewitness – googlevideo

All 3 buildings were demolished


R154464
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

911Truth.org urges nationwide response to United 93
Thursday, April 27, 2006

1. Its critics say United 93 seeks to profit from the misery, blood, sweat and tears of the people who were silenced on September 11th, and who therefore cannot speak for themselves.

We understand those New Yorkers who say even the trailers to United 93 are too disturbing to watch, and that the horror is still too fresh for them to accept September 11th as Hollywood entertainment. Thousands of people in their city continue to pay the heavy price of personal loss associated with losing a loved one. Many more are still scarred by the trauma of directly experiencing the attacks.

An as-yet unknown number also suffer from physical poisoning, after exposure to the toxic dust of Ground Zero. Many of their lives will be cut short as a result. Although the last group includes first responders, the state has exploited legal loopholes to deny many of them compensation, and the federal government is doing little to help them.

Given the reality of treatment accorded the living heroes of September 11th, do we really need new odes to heroism?

more

Post Modified: 04/27/06 12:56:56

R154471
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

The questions that United 93 can’t answer

By Will Bunch
Posted on April 26, 2006 10:57 PM at
http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/003187.html

Once again, Attytood gives you tomorrow’s news today. This is our story that will run on the front page of the Daily News, looking at a few of the unanswered questions that may get lost in the hoopla about the opening of the movie “United 93”:

Virtually everything that is known about United Flight 93, the hijacked jetliner that crashed into a coal field in western Pennsylvania, has been put into the new Hollywood feature film about the doomed voyage.

Director Paul Greengrass not only relied on known transcripts and accounts of real conversations that took place during the Sept. 11, 2001, drama, but he even used some real pilots, crew and flight controllers in filming “United 93.”

“They also believed, as the families believed, that making this film an accurate account – not a conspiratorial effort – would help us,” Greengrass told the Boston Herald recently. “It gave the film a veracity, an authenticity.”

But while Greengrass tackled everything known about the flight — which the government believes was crashed on purpose by its four al-Qaeda hijackers because of the uprising by passenger who’d learned of the crashes at the World Trade Center — there were things the movie could not address.

Those are the unknowns of Flight 93.

Today, few but the most radical sceptics about 9/11 would question the events at the core of “United 93,” the struggle with heroic passengers that was captured on the cockpit voice recording played in a Virginia courtroom earlier this month.

But other questions remain — most notably about the government’s response. Why was the hijacked jet not intercepted by the military jets that had been sent aloft after the Trade Center strikes? Did either President Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney order a shootdown as the plane neared Washington, and why didn’t it happen?

“Unfortunately, we have yet to have a serious and honest investigation into what happened on 9/11,” said Paul Thompson, the author of “The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute.” Thompson believes that officials should still be held accountable for what he considers a flawed military response.

Here’s some of the unanswered questions:

Q. Why weren’t military fighters under the command of the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, able to intercept the doomed Flight 93?

A. Ever since 9/11, Pentagon officials have insisted that NORAD was geared toward a foreign attack and not set up to deal with a domestic hijacking, but there is considerable evidence to contradict that. In fact, the 9/11 Commission found that NORAD had been planning for a June 2002 exercise called Amalgam Virgo 2 that involved a scenario with two simultaneously hijacked planes.

NORAD also told the 9/11 Commission that it hadn’t been informed of the Flight 93 hijacking until it was much too late to respond. However, NORAD Commander Larry Arnold told an author in 2004 that, “We watched the 93 track as it meandered around the Ohio-Pennsylvania area and started to turn south toward DC.” That was some 27 minutes, or more, before Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville, Pa.

In defending its actions, NORAD has said that it launched its remaining F-16 fighters from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia at approximately 9:30 a.m. — roughly 33 to 36 minutes before Flight 93 crashed — but after another hijacked jet had struck the Pentagon, the fighters were needed to defend the perimeter of Washington.

Q. Did high-ranking officials from the Bush administration order fighters to shoot down Flight 93, and did President Bush know about it?

A. The 9/11 Commission said that it was around 10 a.m. when Cheney — running the White House command center because Bush had been speaking at a Florida elementary school — was told that a hijacked plane was 80 miles away and was asked for military authority to shoot it down.

Joshua Bolten, the aide who is now White House chief of staff, testified he suggested that Cheney re-confirm that order with Bush, and the two top officials and other aides said such at call was made.

But according to a June 24, 2005, article in Newsweek, “some on the [9/11] commission staff were, in fact, highly skeptical of the vice president’s account and made their views clearer in an earlier draft of their staff report. According to one knowledgeable source, some staffers ‘flat out didn’t believe the call ever took place.’”

Some have even speculated this issue is why Bush and Cheney took the unusual step of testifying jointly to the 9/11 Commission.

Q. Who was flying the fast-moving, low-flying white jet that was seen by a dozen or more Shanksville residents just seconds after Flight 93 crashed?

A. One of those dozen witnesses was Susan McElwain, who told Britain’s Daily Mirror in 2002: “It had two rear engines, a big fin on the back like a spoiler on the back of a car and with two upright fins at the side….It definitely wasn’t one of those executive jets.” Several residents said the plane resembled the military’s A-10 Warthog.

After several different accounts, the government and a supporting 2005 article in Popular Mechanics said the mystery jet was a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corp., a North Carolina clothing firm. The magazine said the jet was descending into the Johnstown Airport and circled the crash site at the request of the Federal Aviation Administration.

Q. Did Flight 93 really crash at 10:03 a.m.?

A. The transcript from the cockpit voice recorder ends at 10:03:09, which is when the government says it crashed.

But in 2002, the world’s best known forensic seismologist, Terry Wallace, told the Daily News that the evidence was conclusive that the plane crashed nearly three minutes later, at 10:06:05. Wallace now works for the government’s Los Alamos National Laboratory, and efforts to reach him yesterday were not successful.

Q. What about the so-called “911 call”?

A. On Sept. 11, it was widely reported that one of the Flight 93 passengers, believed now to be Edward Felt, reached a 911 operator in Westmoreland County, Pa., and that, “He heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him.”

Since then, that account has been disputed and the 911 operator has been barred from speaking to reporters.

Q. Why haven’t we heard cockpit recordings or seen the flight data recording from the other three flights?

A. Government agencies have insisted that the “black boxes” (actually orange) found at the Pentagon were too badly damaged while the four in New York were never recovered, which was a first.

However, the Daily News reported in 2004 that two Ground Zero rescue workers claimed they helped the FBI recover three of the four “black boxes” there. Last year, Philadelphia freelance writer Dave Lindorff reported a National Transportation Safety Board source told him: “Off the record, we had the boxes. You’d have to get the official word from the FBI as to where they are, but we worked on them here.”

Posted on April 26, 2006 10:57 PM

Post Modified: 04/27/06 13:01:57

R155998
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

9/11, American Empire, and Christian Faith

by David Ray Griffin
April 28, 2006

Note: This essay was originally delivered as a lecture at Trinity Episcopal Church of Santa Barbara, Saturday, March 25, 2006; a DVD of this presentation will be available at the end of May.

In this essay, I offer a Christian critique of the American empire in light of 9/11, and of 9/11 in light of the American empire. Such a critique, of course, presupposes a discussion of 9/11 itself, especially the question of who was responsible for the attacks. The official theory is that the attacks were planned and carried out entirely by Arab Muslims. The main alternative theory is that 9/11 was a “false flag” operation, orchestrated by forces within the US government who made it appear to be the work of Arab Muslims.

Originally, a false flag attack was one in which the attackers, perhaps in ships, literally showed the flag of an enemy country, so that it would be blamed. But the expression has come to be used for any attack made to appear to be the work of some country, party, or group other than that to which the attackers themselves belong.

I will argue that the attacks of 9/11 were false flag attacks, orchestrated to marshal support for a so-called war on terror against Muslim and Arab states as the next stage in creating a global Pax Americana, an all-inclusive empire. I will conclude this essay with its main question: How should Christians in America respond to the realization that we are living in an empire similar to the Roman empire at the time of Jesus, which put him to death for resistance against it.

more

Post Modified: 04/30/06 22:24:11

R156001
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

9/11 Skeptics Get a Loooong (and surprisingly fair) Treatment in New York Magazine

March 20, 2006:

What may be the best coverage ever for the 9/11 truth movement in a US corporate medium was just published as a feature story by Mark Jacobson in the current issue of New York magazine. Jacobson (or his editor) wrap the subject in the familiar defusing language: “Conspiracy theorists run amok… Ground Zero grassy knoll… wild-eyed nuts…” But this is not the usual attack piece. The 8,000-word article fairly summarizes several key arguments underlying 9/11 skepticism, with a bit of extraneous apocrypha tossed in, apparently for color. More significant surely is the inclusion of a dozen books and web sites by name, including this one. (One current and one former regional 911Truth.org director figure in the piece.)

Jacobson describes his own Ground Zero experience, of being warned on the evening of Sept. 11 that WTC 7 was about to fall, seeing it collapse, and still dreaming about it to this day. NIST head investigator Shyam Sunder is forced to admit to Jacobson that he cannot account for the collapse of Seven.

Jacobson provides details of a lecture by Webster Tarpley to 200 people in Manhattan (as part of a weekly series held nearly every Sunday at St. Mark’s Church). He quotes September 11th relative Monica Gabrielle on her realization about the much-disparaged “conspiracy theorists.” “They cared more than those supposedly doing the investigating,” Gabrielle says. “If you ask me they’re just Americans, looking for the truth, which is supposed to be our right.”

Lest you forget, New Yorkers are exercising their right to demand truth at Ground Zero and the offices of Eliot Spitzer, starting at high noon this Wednesday. If you’re anywhere nearby, we hope to see you there. (nl)

————————————————————————————————————————

The following was published by New York Magazine (nymetro.com) on March 19, 2006 and given a cover headline as “9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Run Amok” (original here). Archived (minus the photos) by 911Truth.org solely for educational purposes – see Fair Use Notice, below.

The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll
A new generation of conspiracy theorists is at work on a secret history of New York’s most terrible day.

Post Modified: 04/30/06 22:29:19

R156014
4 years ago
Continuity

Excerpt from The Global Drug Meta-Group: Drugs, Managed Violence, and the Russian 9/11

By Peter Dale Scott 10/29/05

____

(Italics added by me. I pasted this excerpt because it’s one of the few in which PDS thoughtfully reviews the premises set down by David Ray Griffin.)

The False Dilemmas of 9/11 Theories

I said earlier that by suppressing awareness of the role of drug-trafficking in our society, we give drug traffickers a de facto franchise to exert political influence without criticism or opposition. An example of this is the discussion of 9/11 in America, which usually fails to consider the meta-group among the list of possible suspects.

The meta-group’s involvement in the Russian 9/11 of course does nothing to prove its involvement in the American one. However awareness of its presence -– as an unrecognized Force X operating in the world -– makes previous discussions of 9/11 seem curiously limited. Again and again questions of responsibility have been unthinkingly limited to false dilemmas in which the possible involvement of this or any other Force X is excluded.

An early example is Michael Moore’s naïve question to President Bush in Dude, Where’s My Country: “Who attacked the United States on September 11 – a guy on dialysis from a cave in Afghanistan, or your friends, Saudi Arabia?”[124] A far more widespread dilemma is that articulated by David Ray Griffin in his searching critique of the 9/11 Commission Report:

There are two basic theories about 9/11. Each of these theories is a “conspiracy theory.” One of these is the official conspiracy theory, according to which the attacks of 9/11 were planned and executed solely by al-Qaeda terrorists under the guidance of Osama bin Laden….Opposing this official theory is the [sic] alternative conspiracy theory, which holds that the attacks of 9/11 were able to succeed only because they were facilitated by the Bush administration and its agencies.[125]

Griffin of course is not consciously excluding a third possible theory -– that a Force X was responsible. But his failure to acknowledge this possibility is an example of the almost universal cultural denial I referred to earlier. In America few are likely to conceive of the possibility that a force in contact with the U.S. government could be not just an asset, but a force exerting influence on that government.

Post Modified: 05/01/06 00:38:25

R156017
4 years ago
Continuity

In other words, we have to stop saying:

1. It must have been either the terrorists from the Middle-East

or

2. The USGov and its most trusted national allies

We have to include the possibility of

3. International Meta-group(s) whose far-reaching criminal and corporate enterprises exist between the many cracks; who interact with nation-states, multinationals and terrorists, but are not necessarily subordinated to them, because they are an influential force unto themselves.


R156084
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

Since first hearing about the meta-group’s role in the Russian 9/11, I have pondered the question whether it could have played a similar role in the American 9/11 as well. At this point I have to say that I have found no persuasive evidence that would prove its involvement.


R156131
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

Mark Jacobson and New York magazine have mistakenly given the 9/11 nuts credibility. This is just like the problem with creationism and how it doesn’t deserve “equal time” or even a public “debate” anymore, it’s just a waste of time that creationists use to get publicitiy and attention.


R156134
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

Also, the flight manifests that have been released for the four flights have no Arab names on them.

His source: www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html

under about this site:

REPORTED DEAD Includes those whose deaths have been reported by family, employers, mortuaries, places of worship or by the airlines that listed them as aboard one of the four flights. Includes people for whom memorial services have been held, even if their bodies have not been recovered or positively identified. (Those identified by federal authorities as the hijackers are not included).

This guy is a fucking imbecile.


R156138
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

For one thing, the alleged hijackers are portrayed as devout Muslims, ready to meet their maker. Mohamed Atta, called the ringleader, is said by the 9/11 Commission to have become very religious, even “fanatically so.“48 But some journalists found that he loved cocaine, alcohol, gambling, pork, and lap dances. Several of the other alleged hijackers reportedly had similar tastes.49

They’re also religious nutcases that flew planes into buildings. Apparently there’s a special way of acting that nutcases have to follow, otherwise they’re “suspicious.”

_There are also many problems in the official story about Osama bin Laden. In June of 2001, when he was already America’s “most wanted” criminal, bin Laden reportedly spent two weeks in the American Hospital in Dubai, where he was visited by the local CIA agent.52 _

Osama has denied this. The hospital has denied this and said anyone that that claims this doesn’t have a clue how small the hospital is. The CIA has denied this. This article is unsourced with no specific person. It’s complete bullshit.

Why do I even bother reading this? It’s almost like conspiro-porn.

This shit is so retarded, it really isn’t even funny.


R156254
4 years ago
devilsavocado

WTC 1&2 and WTC7 were built with C4 explosive coating the rebar within the concrete for when they needed to be demolished.
This process slowed the steel erectors down considerably…

From a reply 0n lot08’s blog

The documentary focused on the concrete core because the construction of the core was a big slowdown factor. The steel contractors, mostly the indigenous tribes of the area, Onandaga, Iroquois, Mohawk, the best high steel erectors in the world, experiences slowdowns in the perimeter and interior column’s construction, not a part of their bids. They had to lay off crew while the concrete limited to 40 feet vert per pour was completed. Later, after complaints the engineers calculated that 7 floors of steel could be built, instead of just 4, while the concrete caught up. Unfortunately the aerial photos cannot see the steel after maybe the 14 floor or so. What you see in the photos are various cranes and equipment used to move material and support the rebar hanging into the concrete pour.
The actual slowdown was when it was revealed by the government agency constructing, that there was a special anti corrosion, anti vibration resistant coating on the rebar of the concrete core structure. The coating was flammable and special precautions were to be taken, meaning the government would handle the butt welding of the 3 inch vertical bar prior to regular crews running the horizontal minor steel.
Visual screens and a special crew with armed escorts cleaned the coating from the bars, beveled the bar ends, welded the bars (welders working on the main steel couldn’t be used because they didn’t have security clearances). After each tier of concrete was poured the welding had to be completed before the concrete forms could be built.
Keep this concrete core deception in mind because every single web analysis our there uses the FEMA information.
The only way to reconcile this analysis inclusive of the 4 Glaring Inconsistencies is that the thick coatings of the rebar of the cast concrete support core columns were actually made of plastic explosive C4. This would put enough explosive force in direct contact with the most concrete at high enough pressures and enable the instantaneous structural collapse we saw as well as the resulting particulate. Attempting to apply explosives to the exterior of the concrete would have created too much external explosion and made the demo obvious.
This was technology invented in the cold war to make self destruct missile silos.


R156273
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

I really like the first half of David McTard Griffin’s christianity/911 lecture.

Let’s apply his government logic to daily life:

Several jews turn up dead in Germany.

THIS IS STRONG EVIDENCE THAT THE GOVERNMENT DID IT: The German government has killed jews before. That means it’s automatically suspect now!!

This Griffin guy’s an imbecile.


R156319
4 years ago
Continuity

First reply to Senssen

Senssen quoting Scott:

Since first hearing about the meta-group’s role in the Russian 9/11, I have pondered the question whether it could have played a similar role in the American 9/11 as well. At this point I have to say that I have found no persuasive evidence that would prove its involvement.

Scott wrote that because he’s a real scholar. He says: “At this point…” If you read the rest of his essay, he explains that the research has only begun, a number of interesting leads exist and mysteries exist, and he wished people would gather more data in regards to this subject.


R156320
4 years ago
Continuity

Second reply

Mark Jacobson and New York magazine have mistakenly given the 9/11 nuts credibility. This is just like the problem with creationism and how it doesn’t deserve “equal time” or even a public “debate” anymore, it’s just a waste of time that creationists use to get publicitiy and attention.

Rhetoric, straw man, ad hom, whatever. No one cares about creationist analogies. They care about data.


R156323
4 years ago
Continuity

Third reply

I don’t care too much about this issue because the mention of it proves nothing. It seems like a Legend actually, but anyhoo. There’s been enduring confusion as to why the hijackers have never been seen on any flight lists. Let’s say they definitely were on the flights, no shadow of a doubt. Then why are they always edited out? This editing means nothing at the end of the day. But it certainly does confuse people and spawn speculation. So why?


R156326
4 years ago
Continuity

Fourth

They’re also religious nutcases that flew planes into buildings. Apparently there’s a special way of acting that nutcases have to follow, otherwise they’re suspicious.

So far, there’s reason for suspicion. Religious fundamentalist suicide hijackers do not act like Westernized coke pimps, who hang with strippers and drugdealers, then suddenly do a 180. Let’s say it really happened, no shadow of a doubt. One must still admit that it appears uncommon and thus suspicious.

Besides, FBI Mueller has already made sworn testimony that his agency has no idea who the hijackers were.

Fifth

Dubai Hospital: Osama has denied this. The hospital has denied this and said anyone that that claims this doesn’t have a clue how small the hospital is. The CIA has denied this. This article is unsourced with no specific person. It’s complete bullshit.

This story came from the French paper Le Figaro. At the time it was recently purchased by the suspicious Carlyle Group. Soon after the story came out, the Carlyle Group sold the paper.

I also think this Dubai Hospital story is an intelligence ‘Legend’ which was planted. Professor Chossudovsky was honest enough to include the Carlyle Group link, though apparently he disregards it.


R156328
4 years ago
Continuity

Sixth

Why do I even bother reading this? It’s almost like conspiro-porn. This shit is so retarded, it really isn’t even funny.

Good question, why are you pretending not to be interested, and yet you obviously are? Seems this stuff isn’t beneath you, despite what your modifying words say.


R156330
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

Continuity, you’re hilarious, as usual.

This is my daily mental exercising.

It’s also good to be reminded everyday that I’m not one of the gullible toolbags that buy into this conspiro-shit.

You make my day, Continuity!


R156334
4 years ago
Continuity

DevilsAv quotes a poster whho wrote in Lot08’s blog:

The only way to reconcile this analysis inclusive of the 4 Glaring Inconsistencies is that the thick coatings of the rebar of the cast concrete support core columns were actually made of plastic explosive C4.

This leaping premise is very hard to conceptualize. The care that would have to be taken to place all this C4 is mind-boggling.

First of all, there would be no need for special coatings on the industrial grade A core steel components. Once locked in concrete, it’s just not going to corrode. The sample core pieces we have seen just look like normal oxidized steel.

Secondly, anti-vibration coating? Never heard of it.

Third, the C4 mixed in a coating and spread across many steel components?


R156338
4 years ago
Continuity

No problem, Master Senssen. I’ll carry on with weighing things up, and you can continue with your circus. Make sure to use as much rhetoric & slogans as possible because we all know that’s very persuasive.


R156359
4 years ago
Wombat

Con you shouldnt diss Sens so hard. I find that after reading depressing facts on Sep11, Iraq and the total corruption of the US government its good to read a little light comedy. He balances my day with a little belly chuckle and a head shake that some people actually are that blind, stupid and gullible. Hes really doing a public service and should be appreciated as such.


R156365
4 years ago
YT_

This is my daily mental exercising.

lulz


R156391
4 years ago
Continuity

I don’t mind Senssen at all. I hope he posts more.


R156564
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

This stuff about creationism,

This is just like the problem with creationism and how it doesn’t deserve “equal time” or even a public “debate” anymore, it’s just a waste of time that creationists use to get publicitiy and attention.

There are at least three people, who routinely criticize the MIHOPers, and who continue to compare creationists to people, who believe that 911 was an inside job, and I don’t see the relevance.

I mean wouldn’t it be the other way around? Wouldn’t you compare the creationists to the gullible folks, who believe the government’s 911 myth?

Post Modified: 05/01/06 22:58:14

R156635
4 years ago
zark

You all seen 911 Eyewitness then?

Most of us are in total agreement that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition and now most of us are arguing over who did it and why they did it. we know who gained out of it and who are using it to gain more power and control and that would be the Bush Admin, Weapons Manufacturers and The Banking Industry.

Creationists — would they attempt to physically manifest Biblical teachings? well yeah, they attempt to control thinking and behaviour so why wouldnt they go the whole hog? Yet, i would say “innocent until proven guilty” and if you accuse without proof then you should be charged with slander.

sensse
They’re also religious nutcases that flew planes into buildings

Well except for the ones who are still alive.

Peter Dale Scott
Very good writer. ‘deep politics’ doesnt finger point anyone in particular instead says they whole structure is fucked. The structure is self-determining; controls and is not controlled. i.e GATT controls national economics and national laws but was written decades ago. It allows blameless decisions. GM Maize seed was voted as acceptable in the UK 6 months ago because —- GATT allowed the WTO to dictate to the EU who dictated to the UK ministers. Peter Mandleson pushed for this but he isnt to blame, the finger doesnt stop on him. The Blame can only be levied at beaurocrasy.

9/11 was exactly the same. No one group were responsible and this is why there is such a cover-up and agreement between groups not to talk about the explosions in the towers. No talk about what hit the pentagon and no talk about the ‘event’ in Pennsylvania.
The entire governmental structure and NGO structure are out of control and co-inciding in the most spectacular ways e.g.

War Game Exercises on 9/11 — actual event occurs on 9/11
Terror Exercise on 7/7 London —- actual event occurs

Zionists, Creationists, Muslims, Fundamental Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Illuminati, Masons are easy groups to blame because any other explanation would be too much to accept.
To accept that the economic structure – through beaurocrasy — is the cause would shatter cultural perceptions and perceived social structures.

Its soo easy to say — exercise drills were cover stories ( which i agree with but in a different context).

Post Modified: 05/02/06 02:01:12

R156651
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

and I don’t see the relevance

that’s because you’re stupid.

I dare Stephen E. Jones to actually get his paper published in a peer-reviewed scientific physics journal instead of another crap 9/11 conspiracy screed book. Oh wait, the peer reviewers are part of the conspiracy too. Avoid peer review, write a BS book instead (this is so much like creationism it’s not even funny).


R156688
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

that’s because you’re stupid.

Is that you Joe?

Post Modified: 05/02/06 08:31:07

R156701
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll is an article from New York Magazine, which I posted bove, but I will post again, this time from the magazine’s website, so you can get the layout.

This is a very interesting article, because, when it starts out, it looks like a criticism of the conspiracy theories, but it is not that at all. It outlines all the different theories from MIHOP to LIHOP, from the Mossad Did It, to the Oilmen Did It, to Bush and Cheney Did It, to A Rogue Network Did It, to the New World Order Did It.

There is quite a bit of discussion of Webster Tarpley in the beginning. This definitely is a must read, and it is anothr indication that 911 has gone mainstream to a degree, and it is not going away.

The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll

Post Modified: 05/02/06 08:41:28

R156747
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

Is that you Joe?

I miss your post that you modified where you call me a “punk.” I must have hit a nerve with you by pointing out you are the intellectual equivilent of a creationist. It really burns, don’t it?

I believe that’s the same thing HackieMcUltrasackie called me when I pointed out the articles he was posting provided zero evidence to support his claim (from a wacko banned cult) that china was secretly running a death camp that has killed thousands of people out of a hospital. Then it was the classic “You’re missing the big picture, glug glug glug.” Ah, good times with the GNN conspiracy ‘tards.

I take it with stride.


R156790
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Is that you Joe?

BTW, it is I take it in stride, not with stride.

Post Modified: 05/02/06 12:38:35

R156793
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Nevermind the whacko conspiracy sights, which may or may not contain things that I agree or disagree with, you just concentrate on Lt. Col. Bowman and what he says about 911.

Bowman said that he first got an inkling that there was something wrong with the official story, on Sept 12, 2001, because all of a sudden, the Bush administration was giving us the names and pictures of the 19 Arab hijackers, after apparently being so clueless in the months leading up to 911.

Also, Bowman said there was a massive cover-up and destruction of evidence. If the government had nothing to hide, he said, why is it hiding all the evidence? Why destroy the physical evidence from the WTC, why is it confiscating surveillance video from the Pentagon, the voice tapes from the air traffic controllers, and the three black boxes. If it does not have anything to hide, show us the evidence, said Bowman.

Bowman said the important thing to remember is, that they would never have gotten near the targets, if ordinary, standard practices had been followed that day, and then he gave the example of Paine Stewart’s plane, when it took 16 minutes for the Air Force to get jets up right next to Stewart’s plane, so they could make sure the plane did not land somewhere and hurt people. Alex Jones reminded Bowman that the Air Force went up 67 times in the year before 2001.

Alex Jones wanted to know why the pilots flew so slowly. Bowman, who was once an interceptor pilot himself, and said he knows the drill very well, said he did some calculations. He looked at the time that the pilots got their order to scramble and factored in some other facts. Bowman said they could not have gotten there any faster, that they could not have flown at the F15’s top advertised speed. The problem, Bowman said, was that they were scrambled about a half an hour too late, but if they were on time and flew at the speed they actually flew at, they could have gotten to the WTC and intercepted those aircrafts before they got there, and Flight 77 could have been intercepted long before it got to the Pentagon.

Bowman said that when an aircraft goes off course, or loses voice communications, or the transponder signal gets lost, jets are scrambled. In the case of 911, all three of these things happened. Bowman said that somehow the people, who do this job, had to be prevented from doing the normal thing. If the government stayed out of it, he said, the jets would have been intercepted.

Bowman said that, when it comes to motive, you have to look at the Neo-cons who run our government, because before Bush ever became president, they published PNAC, which said that the U.S. must occupy Iraq permanently and use it as a staging base for the military control of Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the former southern Soviet republics around the Caspian, to control two trillion dollars worth of oil and gas, build a pipeline through Afghanistan, through Iran, and through Bosnia, yes, Bowman said, even Clinton was in on this stuff.

Bowman said that our government could say this is a case of massive incompetence, but how come nobody in the chain of command was fired, reprimanded, or court-martialed. Instead key players were promoted or given medals of freedom.

Bowman said that he used to be a conservative Republican, because he believed in their three main tenets, fiscal responsibility, avoiding foreign military entanglements, and the protection of individual rights of Americans, but the Neo-cons, Bowman said, have done just the opposite.

Who carried out 911? The prime suspect is Dick Cheney, Bowman said, but the fact of the matter is, we need a true independent investigation, because, as Bowman said, the 911 Commission omitted anything that could detract from the 911 Commission Report.

Bowman said that we don’t have the evidence to know whether it is LIHOP or MIHOP. Bowman said that the military chain of command could have been innocent tools. He said that the drills that were run on 911, which simulated the exact thing that happened on 911, so confused the people in FAA and NORAD, that they did not know what was real and what was in the exercise. Therefore, Bowman said, the people who carried out the drills should be investigated.

Bowman said that he is running for Congress and wants to get a real investigation, but he does not want to be presumptuous. He wants to prove we do not know the answers and we need to get a real investigation. Alex Jones asked Bowman was 911 carried out by a combination of black operations and the private corporations that run our government, and Bowman said “that sounds good to me”.

Bowman said that there were a lot of FBI people who did their jobs and were stopped from doing anything further by higher-ups, and he recommended that these people keep doing their jobs and protect this country by blowing the whistle and investigating the real perpetrators of 911. Bowman said that he has been a whistleblower and as a result has been the target of attempted bribery, attempted blackmail; phone taps, CIA harassment, IRS harassment, FBI harassment, and death threats.

Post Modified: 05/02/06 12:29:27

R156795
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Let’s hear some rebuttal to Lt. Col. Bowman, and when you get through with that rebuttal, let us know what you think about Colonel Nelson.

Then if you give us something more than your usual you are a bunch of retards, we might gain some respect for you, otherwise, give it up, you are on the wrong channel, you need to go to FOX News.

I’ve got something new, another retired Air Force colonel, with 34 years in service, who is a trained aircraft accident investigator, and he is speaking out about 911. Here is the article. In the next to last paragraph, Colonel Nelson recommends three websites for researching 911.

I’m George Nelson; I served four years of enlisted service, and 30 additional years as a commissioned officer in the Air Force——Please, let me begin by saying, that I get no pleasure or personal satisfaction whatsoever from speaking out in opposition to the US government’s official conclusions, and the 911 Commission’s official report of the tragedy that occurred on September 11th, 2001.

I’m a trained aircraft accident investigator. I completed the University of Southern California’s accident investigation course in 1989. I was an aircraft maintenance manager throughout my military career and was assigned additional duties as a member of accident investigations for the Air Force. In every case of an aircraft loss, an accident investigation was always conducted and a report was issued through command channels, and it made no difference if the loss was due to an obvious accident or if it had been shot down by enemy fire. An investigation was always conducted, and a report was always filed, even if the plane was under 5,000 feet of water and not recoverable.

In the case of all four reported aircraft losses on 9-11, each one was reported to have been carrying commercial passengers aboard scheduled commercial airliners. Federal Aviation regulations in Part 121, governs the operations of all scheduled airlines that operate inside the United States, including foreign airlines, which transit through our airports in commercial operations.

In the case of each aircraft loss that occurred on 9-11, the regulations are very clear and unambiguous—investigations were required, and the reports would have covered the loss circumstances in excruciating detail, including all collateral damage incurred. Especially in the cases of such horrendous loss of life, collection of physical evidence would have been paramount in determining the precise causes of each loss. Scientific and reasoned deductions are permitted only after an exhaustive search and analysis of physical evidence has been completed. Hundreds of parts from each of those four aircraft are critical for safety of flight, and as such, must be meticulously controlled by only one-of-a-kind, dedicated, serial numbers. These parts are required by FAA regulations to be tracked and removed and replaced at a designated number of flying hours or a number of actual cycles. Just like the toughness of black boxes, these components are virtually indestructible and relatively easy to find among the crash wreckage. Each of the aircraft would have two engines that are nine feet in diameter, and would have had many of the critical, serialized parts installed. Several sets of massive landing gears would have been easy to find and identify, and each of these parts would have been linked to one, and only one aircraft in the world. The aircraft parts from the two World Trade Center buildings, the Pentagon and the hole in the ground at Shanksville, Pennsylvania would have disclosed the specific identity of each aircraft, and those parts did not “vaporize” as some Pentagon spokespersons have reported. The parts may have since “vaporized” but not during the reported crashes. The well-known “Black Boxes” were reported to have been found, but were immediately confiscated and seem to have since, disappeared.

Independent news photographers and investigators at Shanksville, Pennsylvania were kept far away from the reported aircraft crash site by security cordons and guards. The public could only view the crash site by an aerial photo. The photo shows an impact area only 20 feet long by 10 feet wide, and the photo shows no sign of crash wreckage inside the small area. Most small fighter planes create larger holes than that, and again, no aircraft accident report has been made public. This only serves to heighten the public’s growing skepticism of the 911 Commission report.

And then we have the reported crash of a Boeing 757 with a 125-foot wingspan that was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon. It made a 16-foot diameter hole in the building at ground floor, and penetrated three inner rings of the building and left an almost perfect circular hole as it exited the third inner ring of the building. If an aluminum Boeing 757 had struck that fortified building, there would have been more aluminum on the ground outside than what went inside, yet there was little visible evidence of an airplane crash on the outside. What physical evidence that could have been of some value, was immediately carted away under cover. And once again, there’s the annoying problem of the missing Black Boxes.

In the interest of time, I’m going to relate just one more piece of key evidence. The aircraft that was reported in the government’s official story to have crashed into the south tower was United Airlines, Flight 175 carrying 65 passengers, including the crew and five highjackers. One of the television news cameras captured the Boeing 767, just as it was banking into a left turn, seconds before striking the building. Underneath the fuselage, installed across the starboard aircraft wing root, is a visible, large piece of equipment that most viewers have called a “Pod”. Many have speculated what purpose the “Pod” might have served on a passenger carrying, scheduled airliner, but such speculation is pointless at the present time. The fact is, that such extraneous equipment would have never have been installed on a Part 121, scheduled airliner in the first place. Every piece of equipment proposed for use on an aircraft after its production must be issued a Supplemental Type Certificate by the FAA prior to installation. No record of an STC was found that would authorize such external equipment to be used on a Part 121, Boeing 767 airliner. This leads to a more disturbing speculation, that the airplane seen hitting the south tower was not UAL flight 175, but a plane that had been substituted for flight 175.

The National Transportation Safety Board decides which of three organizations will take the lead role in Part 121 accident investigations. Sometimes the NTSB will assume the lead, and in some cases they will assign lead responsibility to the FAA, but most always if criminal foul play is suspected, the lead role will be assigned to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with the technical assistance of both the FAA and NTSB. It’s fair to say, in this case that the NTSB suspected criminal foul play on 9-11, so which agency had primary responsibility for the investigations and required reporting? Where are the reports? Where is the physical evidence to back up those reports? Does anyone recall TWA Flight 800 that was bound from the US to Paris about four years ago? The FBI was assigned the lead role, suggesting that foul play was suspected, and the FBI gave almost daily reports on the evening news channels, but ultimately the FBI’s conclusion was, that a spark in one of the internal fuel tanks caused the fatal explosion. At least we all knew in that case, there was an investigation conducted, such as it was.

I could go on and on with the many weaknesses in the 9-11 Commission’s report, but there’s little reason to belabor the details, so I’d like to offer just two or three websites where anyone who’s the least bit interested can find most every weakness in the 9-11 Commission report. In these few minutes we’ve just begun to scratch the surface. For further information, we suggest you research the following websites for yourself, but there are many more credible sources available. Check out—- www.st911.org; www.physics911.net or the website edited by the couple sitting to my left; www.wingtv.net/.

I’m frequently asked by people hearing me speak about9-11, “Why in the world are you speaking out about this tragedy? Doesn’t it worry you?” I answer the same way every time I’m asked——- “Because I’m a man with a conscience. You can see by my age that I must have grand children, and I do. I’m about to turn this country that I deeply love, over to my children and my grand children. And as I look around, I don’t like what I see happening to it.

Thanks for listening.

Post Modified: 05/02/06 12:37:40

R157077
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

If an aluminum Boeing 757 had struck that fortified building, there would have been more aluminum on the ground

oh no! the truth is coming out about 9/11!!

There wasn’t enough aluminum on the ground! They’ve figured out that it was actually made of cheese!

I must inform my CIA superiors!


R157085
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Let’s hear some rebuttal to Lt. Col. Bowman, and when you get through with that rebuttal, let us know what you think about Colonel Nelson.

Then if you give us something more than your usual you are a bunch of retards, we might gain some respect for you, otherwise, give it up, you are on the wrong channel, you need to go to FOX News.

Don’t try to avoid it. Come on big talker, give us what you got, if you can?

Post Modified: 05/02/06 22:05:09

R157135
4 years ago
carcinogen

senssensibilityr, I’ve come to respect your name on GNN for your thoughtfulness and rationality. So don’t take this as a personal attack.

But I’m somewhat taken aback by your “you must be an idiot to swallow this garbage” stance on those concerned about the possibility of a 9/11 conspiracy, myself included.

In my eyes, there is compelling, unanswered eyewitness and testimonial evidence that should be brought into the public domain and brought before an independent, unbiased investigation panel.

My $0.02

Post Modified: 05/02/06 23:41:59

R157137
4 years ago
carcinogen

Oops, doublepost. Nothing to see here.

Post Modified: 05/02/06 23:41:10

R157157
4 years ago
zark

senssensibilityr, I’ve come to respect your name on GNN for your thoughtfulness and rationality. So don’t take this as a personal attack

like he/she gives a shit about ad hominem arguments.

You’re taken aback by his/her writing? ffs, he/she is just provoking you. Thats it no more.

He/she knows that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition but enjoys winding you all up. Are you new to the internet? Is this the only forum you have been on?

Senssi / Shogo

Its quite simple.

Even schneib admits that the official story is bollocks BUT defends how the towers fell and even goes as far to say is doesnt matter who ordered the NORAD standdown, who funded Mohammed Atta, who was behind the scenes.

You see once something has been established — ie

1. The official story is bollocks
2. High ranking officials were conducting war games on 9/11
3. The towers were brought down by controlled demolition

the trolls move onto the next thing — who did it and why.

Post Modified: 05/03/06 02:04:00

R157237
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Yeah this kid Sensibility, he is been trying to edge his way in here, with this little act he puts on, boo hoo, look at the conspiracy theorist, I don’t know what possessess him, but we check him on his lack of knowledge, he doesn’t know anything, never talks about anything, and tries to get away with it.

In the meantime, sensi, I’m waiting for your rebuttal to Lt. Col. Bowman and your rebuttal to Colonel Nelson, otherwise don’t bother coming back please.


R157362
4 years ago
carcinogen

Sensibility is active in the Yard, has good blogs, and contributes excellent headlines. Which was why I was sort of confused when I saw some of his statements on the forums.

I’m a conspiracy buff because I enjoy thought-experiments into the areas that most people find “improbable, thus impossible!”

While I’m no apologist, looking over more of where senssensibilityr is attacking the notion that “controlled demolition MUST have happened” rationale, which on that level I also agree with. But at first glance it really just comes across as blanket 9/11 conspiracy-theorist bashing, which was what I was taken aback by.

“20, male, blonde hair and blue eyes. I enjoy long walks on the beach, romantic candle-lit dinners, sushi, giving massages, and discussing enthralling conspiracy theories over champagne. Call (175) 911-9377. Tell the husky male voice the codeword ‘cheney’”

I look into conspiracies because I enjoy investigating the plausibility of a lesser-accepted argument, not because “I’m a complete idiot.” I take offense to that notion :)

Post Modified: 05/03/06 12:38:24

R157366
4 years ago
zark

carcinogen controlled demolition MUST have happened — watch “911 Eyewitness”

it is available on bittorrent (700mb great quality) and googlevideo (unsure of google quality).


R157370
4 years ago
carcinogen

Well I can’t ascertain, for certain, that the WTC buildings were demolished by explosives. But there’s compelling evidence and testimony that needs to be addressed and investigated. Do I believe they were destroyed by explosives? Certainly, but I don’t actually know beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Post Modified: 05/03/06 12:35:38

R157379
4 years ago
zark

carcinogen — try to find a bit of time to watch it. No conspiracy notions, just a camera and microphone set up across the hudson showing the days events from a previously unseen position.


R157507
4 years ago
carcinogen

I’ve already watched all three parts. A loud explosion occurs 14 seconds before the towers collapse, figuring in the speed of sound, and dust is seen rising from the base of the towers as a result of that explosion. Then the towers begin to collapse.

A very convincing piece of evidence in 911 Eyewitness, is where he demonstrates that that the angle of the outer-edge of the falling debris follows a precise 45-degree upwards arc. Falling towers don’t create 45-degree upward angles, but explosives do. I wish more people would cite those findings.


R157701
4 years ago
zark

well yeah.

explosions occur before each tower falls, multiple explosions.

seismic data explained

the tower falling to the side, then being sucked back into the footprint

debris being ejected 100’s of feet, upward and outward.

so while i do agree that trolls are worthwhile, sometimes, in this case they are just just extremely useless.


R157715
4 years ago
Continuity

Carcinogen yes, the very large dust clouds coming from the base of WTC2, well before its collapse, are hard to ignore. Would you agree that not one, but several explosions could be heard before WTC2 collapses? It’s this kind of stuff that keeps the Demo possibility still plausible imo.

Post Modified: 05/04/06 00:49:50

R157731
4 years ago
zark

Well, i watched the 700mb version (now bought the dvd) using decent speakers and an onboard audio setup i heard all the explosions before both towers colapsed.

i would suggest using speakers that have a good frequency range and subwoofer. I think the googlevideo and the 3 small file version loses the audio quality.

I am beyond possibility, it is a fact those towers and wtc7 were brought down by controlled demolition.
911 eyewitness + firefighter transcripts +interviews +news reports of explosions = 100% controlled demolition.
The “who did it?”, “how the explosives were planted there” and “why?” is where i am now.

additional i like the fact that seigels footage hasnt been used by any other filmmaker plus all my mates who initially were “ ‘zark’ ure out there man, controlled demolition shut up!” watched this video and all said that it was pretty conclusive and seigal was excellent. They also preferred that seigal and the film didnt get into conspiracy notions.. he just talks about what we see and he recorded.

Post Modified: 05/04/06 03:47:30

R158334
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

They also preferred that seigal and the film didnt get into conspiracy notions.. he just talks about what we see and he recorded.

The good evidence is multiplying isn’t it? There’s a lot of good stuff out there now. Lt. Col. Bowman happens to be an ex-fighter pilot, who flew interceptors, we have Colonel Nelson, who just happened to have been an airline crash investigator, there are finally released the 515 testimonies from the firemen and emergency medical workers, we have the very powerful and credible testimony of William Rodriguez, who told his story to the 911 Commission, but they never reported any of it, it just keeps adding up, not to mention the well organized arguments many of the 911 researchers have made including Lt. Col. Bowman, who argued that the alleged hijackers would never have gotten near the targets, if ordinary, standard practices had been followed that day, and explained that the fighter jets were scrambled about a half an hour too late, but if they were on time and flew at the speed they actually flew at, they could have gotten to the WTC and intercepted those aircrafts before they got there, and Flight 77 could have been intercepted long before it got to the Pentagon.

Bowman said that when an aircraft goes off course, or loses voice communications, or the transponder signal gets lost, jets are scrambled. In the case of 911, all three of these things happened. Bowman said that somehow the people, who do this job, had to be prevented from doing the normal thing. If the government stayed out of it, he said, the jets would have been intercepted.

Post Modified: 05/04/06 23:29:01

R158336
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Also, the work of the 9-11 scholars has helped the 911 cause tremendously, the work of Stephen E. Jones, David Ray Griffin, Morgan Reynolds and others.

Post Modified: 05/04/06 23:31:59

R158626
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

Yeah, just like the creationo-tards have this list.


R158666
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Boy, you sure are hung up on creationism.


R158692
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Friday, May 05, 2006
Dr. Steven Jones Shares Comments Received Regarding His 9/11 Paper

Comments regarding Prof. Jones’ “Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?”

Just got this in via email in a Word document, converted it to html, and you can find it at the link above. Be sure to check out the whole page as we have only quoted a few of the responses here.

A very special thanks to Brian from 911truthseekers.org for giving us the heads up, and to Professor Jones for sharing!

9-11 Blogger

Post Modified: 05/05/06 22:11:44

R158694
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

05/05/2006
Comments regarding Prof. Jones Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse
Category: 9/11 Research Papers :

————————————————————————————————————————

Author: Brian (6:01 pm)
May 5, 2006

1. Email to Prof Jones from a structural engineer in Texas:

“It occurred to me that structural engineers and architects are practitioners of static physics [like yourself] although we use different terminology peculiar to our professions to elaborate on our designs.

I am surprised how few of my colleagues have expressed public disbelief at the official line which lurches from theory to theory as the shortcomings of each became apparent. I guess they have run out of ideas on Building 7.

You nailed the biggest problem when you focused on the symmetry of collapse in comparison to the asymmetry of the damage… Steel high rises are designed (and overdesigned) as cantilever beams on end. There is so much redundant steel in these buildings because they have to resist hurricane force winds. Was there a hurricane in New York on Sept 11?

If steel framed structures designed by world class engineers (who are still being commissioned to design high rises elsewhere in the world) can collapse with so little provocation, I should send my diploma back and take up fortune telling.

So astute that the president promptly declared 9/11 an Act of War (the truth, sort of). This relieved the designers of having to defend themselves for negligent design. No professional liability policies cover war (because of exposure to explosives etc.), so no deep pockets to make a lawsuit worth while. So no engineer singing to a jury…”

2. From another structural engineer:

“A couple of months back I examined [Jones] claims in detail. Initially I was a bit incredulous… so I downloaded all the official reports basically expecting to find holes in the good prof’s hypothesis.
I’m a professional civil engineer with a lot of experience in the construction of major structures and I was just astounded at what I found. In my COO days if my staff had put up reports like that relating to a disaster on my patch, there is no way they would have been accepted and I would have been asking some very tough questions: The [official] reports are not at all convincing.
That they are not is a serious worry.
Regards, Ted [last name withheld pending permission]

3. From a Mechanical Engineering Professor, email to Dr. Jones:

“You may be interested in the fact that I have begun approaching discussions of the WTC “collapses” in my classes. It began with the appearance of your [SE Jones] article, last fall. I found the article just before class, and left it on my laptop so that when I plugged in the laptop projector, the students would see it. (I tried to make it look accidental.) Some were very interested, but I had a few violent responses… (e.g. “I’m extremely offended”) and a few of the students acted as though they would turn me in to the Dean. I’m embarrassed to say that I backed down.
That was on a Friday (Veteran’s Day). By Monday, I had my wagons in a circle and was ready to take on the Dean, if need be. I felt the topic of the WTC was totally appropriate to discuss in this class (Engineering Statics), and I could counter any logical argument against it. By the end of the semester, at least a third of the class was seriously questioning the official story. Also, I’ve been continually improving my techniques for approaching this topic in my classes, and it has become very rewarding.
Last Thursday, I introduced the topic to my Strength of Materials class for the first time, and about half of the class jumped in to the debate. The topic of the day was material properties and how heat affects the strength and stiffness of steel. How could I resist? I was so pleased to find that half of the class was willing to debate the issue.
As far as I know, I’m the only person in my department that doesn’t buy the official story, and this bothers me. I have approached a few others, but they’ve each thought I was crazy, yet were unwilling to look at the facts. So far, I’ve not been called to the dean’s office or the chair’s office for covering this material.
Beginning with your article, last semester, I made a separate folder on the class web space where I put links to various articles and videos.
Last September [2005], you corresponded with my friend… In his letter to you, Alex mentioned that he has a friend who is an engineering professor. I am the person he was referring to.
I’m sorry I didn’t contact you then. I was afraid of what might happen with my career.
Now, I’m more afraid of what is happening with the world than with my career.
I’m writing you now because I’d like to join your Scholars for 9/11 Truth team.” [Prof. J. Wood at Clemson University]

4. From a mechanical engineer with ‘government contacts’, sent to Prof Jones and BYU administrators:

[Nov. 2005, shortly after Prof. Jones’ article first appeared on the web] “The publication of this [Jones] article can be stopped on the basis of endangerment, and I have the contacts to make this happen if necessary, but I prefer to give you the opportunity to consider the consequences – which you have not addressed. You need to give this very serious consideration. This is an issue that is more important than any individual career, or whether or not you believe that you are correct. …The molten metal may be the best evidence that local conditions in the fire where [sic] hotter than the post-test evaluation of specific points… your theories are likely to be subject to intense scrutiny and criticism. As painful as it may seem now, perhaps it may be less painful than could occur after publication.”

[Nov. 2005, after responses by Prof. Jones]: “The North Tower “squibs” [Jones discusses in his paper] are more interesting and deserve more attention because they are quite similar to the material ejected from the Southwark Towers shown at Implosionworld.com/cinema.htm.”

[Dec. 2005, following answers and detailed responses by Prof. Jones]: “I… have learned to appreciate the value of silence, even in the case of superior data and information…. There are, perhaps, several reasons why the administration [at BYU] would pay more particular attention to me than to you in this matter. First, you made many assertions without the least amount of analysis to support your assertions… [Prof. Jones challenged this comment!]

“I regret that you are still trying to publish your paper. The fact that a paper passes peer review and is accepted for publication should not be viewed as validation of ideas unless the peer reviewers are really qualified to perform the peer review.

“In contrast to studying things that could cause harm, the whole focus could be changed to something that is assured to prevent harm… Maybe a low velocity rocket fired from a helicopter could disperse fire retardants on a floor that can’t be reached otherwise. Even if explosives are planted, this makes it much more difficult to cause the collapse of the building. If this interests you, I would be happy to contact Tom Hunter and the Head of Homeland Security to see if funding for BYU could be found to research options for this purpose.

Again, I am sorry for the difficulty of this interaction.”

[end of Dec., 2005]: “Steven: I have recently given some thought to how I can help you preserve your good name at BYU. My intent is to show that I have as much concern for your well being as I have in preserving the safety and security of others.

“It is better to demonstrate that structural collapse can be prevented than to show how or why structures may be collapsed. Toward this goal, I have recently had some ideas that may be inexpensive, passive, light weight and effective against attack by both fire and explosives. [A rather detailed outline for a suggested grant proposal follows, snip…]

“The concept is patentable, could be easily applied during construction (beneath facia), could be required by building codes, and has a potentially large market. Naturally, research is required to define the required thicknesses, attachment in a way that preserves existing fire protection, and attachment in a way that is difficult to remove without obvious alterations. It could even be added as a decorative feature in existing buildings.

“Perhaps you may come up be different or better ideas, but it suggests a course of action that protects others, rather than put them at risk. It could bring substantial resources to BYU, and could involve a cooperative effort between the structural design group and physics department. This would give you the opportunity to address your explosive ideas without having to capitulate, while improving the resistance of the structure to collapse by fire. It also generates a project that could bring the various departments together in a cooperative effort. Naturally, you are most likely to achieve the greatest success in such an effort if you change course, rather than continue to pursue your present effort…” [Name withheld. The reader can judge for her/himself the statements and tactics used by this man with “contacts.” Note that his comments and efforts to thwart publication of the Jones paper did not succeed, but may have influenced the statement by the BYU Fulton College of Engineering which follows.]

5. [The following was posted at the web site of the BYU Fulton College of Engineering and Technology from November 2005 to April 2006, when it was removed without explanation.]

“Professor Jones’s department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review. The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones.”

[Comments by Prof. Richard McGinn]: “Notice the form it takes. It undermines Jones’ hypotheses with a hand-wave about academic procedure. No mention of the substance of Jones’ work.

“Another problem of the statement: The Physics Department at BYU, which ran its own version of the offending statement on its web site last [autumn], was persuaded to take it down following a letter-writing campaign. Yet the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology continues to run the statement, including the surprising contention that “Professor Jones’ own department” remains unconvinced. Well, is this true or not? Why did the Physics Department remove the offending statement from its own site? Did they have a change of heart, or did our letters merely induce the chair to stop harassing a faculty member, from a sudden burst of collegiality?

“It would really, really help if we could find ways to get engineers and scientists to focus on the substance of Professor Jones’ hypotheses.” Richard McGinn

6. [Letter from Prof. McGinn to the Dean of the BYU Fulton College of Engineering and Technology, March 27, 2006]:

March 27, 2006

Alan R. Parkinson, Dean

Fulton College of Engineering and Technology

270 CB

Brigham Young University

Provo, UT 84602

Dear Dean Parkinson,

I am writing to you both as an individual and a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (ST911.org). At issue is a statement posted on the Engineering College’s web site that is harmful to the career and reputation of BYU physicist Steven Jones.

The web site makes three questionable statements. First, it implies that Dr. Jones’ in-progress research into the physics of the 9/11 attacks in New York has not yet been subjected to a relevant and sufficiently rigorous peer review process.

Second, it states without substantiation: “The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones.” If they really mean this, the engineers should defend the official FEMA and NIST reports which Jones challenges, giving specifics.

Third, it names Dr. Jones’ own department as complicit in all of this, and in particular, that the Physics Department is “not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review.”

I hereby request the Engineering College to remove the offending statement from its web site. At the very least, the College should remove the reference to Dr. Jones’ home department on the basis of the following, new, information. One of Dr. Jones’s research papers [“Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?”] has undergone relevant and sufficient peer-review, and has been accepted for publication in a book to appear later this year, titled “9/11 and the American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out” (Northampton, Mass: Olive Branch Press, 2006), edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott. In fact, as you may know, this paper had been peer reviewed for a publication by Elsevier Press. But after the stated concerns about “rigorous technical peer review,” the paper was withdrawn and submitted to a different publication and peer reviewed again. One of the editors, while maintaining anonymity of the reviewers, disclosed that four PhDs reviewed this paper, two of whom were physicists (and thus peers). Notably, even before the fact of this forthcoming, peer-reviewed publication, BYU’s Physics Department revised its own web site last fall, removing its reference to Dr. Jones’ in-progress research. Therefore, as a first step, it behooves the Engineering College to follow suit, and to remove the following passage from the web site:

“Professor Jones’ department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review. The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones.”

There are additional reasons for deleting the unprofessional and unethical statement. First, although I am not a member of American Society of Civil Engineers, I am permitted, according to the ASCE code, to lodge an ethics complaint against an engineer. (The ombudsman for formal complaints to ASCE is: tsmith@asce.org).

Second, no dean has the right to represent individual faculty, much less the entire faculty of BYU’s Engineering College, on the issue of whether they do (or do not) “support” a colleague’s research, whether published or in-progress. The offending statement is a breach of collegiality, and seems as well to infringe upon Professor Jones’ academic freedom.

Most poignantly, it is inconsistent with the code of ethics of the American Society of Civil Engineers, by which you, as dean of the Engineering College, are bound, given that your web site claims to represent the opinions of an entire faculty of BYU engineers. The ASCR Code states in part:

CANON 5.

g. Engineers shall not maliciously or falsely, directly or indirectly, injure the professional reputation, prospects, practice or employment of another engineer or indiscriminately criticize another’s work.”

If members of the College disagree with Dr. Jones’ assertions in his paper that the official FEMA and NIST reports are inadequate as they stand, then they should be specific in their reasons for supporting those reports, neither of which provides (routine) visualizations for finite element analyses.

Sincerely yours,

Richard McGinn

… mcginn@ohio.edu

CC: ASCE Ombudsman

AAUP Committee on Academic Freedom

[The web-statement by the Engineering College was soon removed.]

7. Email to Dr. Jones from an explosives expert:

“I am a veteran of the United States Air Force and served for 10 years as an Explosive Ordnance Disposal Specialist.

“I have read your paper concerning the WTC towers collapse and agree; Military thermite [which contains sulfur as an accelerant] is the only explanation for the molten slag found weeks after the collapse.… Thermite charges used in conjunction with small linear shaped charges could be used to drop the World Trade Center towers.

Keep fighting the good fight.

Sincerely,
Michael …” 1/29/06 Email to Prof SE Jones
Note on linear-shaped charges: “... Linear-shaped charges focus the energy of the charge into a line, generating about 3,000,000 pounds per square inch of pressure. This pressure creates a flow in the steel, forcing the steel aside. Such charges can be used to slice steel as thick as 10 inches.” CDI p 43

8. Email to Prof. Jones from a Professor of Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT:

“I agree wholeheartedly with one comment [in Jones’ paper] – that the [official] enquiries are grossly inadequate and the conclusions may well be wrong. I have publicly stated that they are significant for what they do NOT say rather than for what they say. Building engineers on the defensive.”
9. Rep. Curt Weldon Town Hall Meeting (April 2006, transcript from audio tape)

Dave Slesinger: First, I want to praise you for your Able Danger efforts. Since you are the Congressman most sympathetic to firefighters, have you looked at the quotes from NYC firefighters at the World Trade Center on 9/11 about explosives? If you have, will you accept information on [this] for later comment?

Rep. Weldon: I will absolutely accept information, and I’m very close to the NYC firefighters because one of my best friends was killed there…

I talk to the fire department on a regular basis. When the Republican convention was held in New York in 2004, I went up a day early, I went down to the fire department headquarters. I spent the day with them. And when I finished the briefings, and getting their input, as to what happened on 9/11, which I had ongoing, I went up and spent two hours running with Engine 54 (inaudible) in midtown Manhattan. And I wanted to do that because on 9/11 all 15 firefighters on duty from that station were killed. And I wanted the firefighters to give me their views without going through any chiefs or other officers about what happened.

Now, there’s a lot of theorists out there about what occurred. And uh, I haven’t gone into the structural elements of the building. The fact that there are reports on multiple explosions on other floors… I am open to that information. I’m willing to challenge the system. And uh, and don’t automatically discount anything that’s told to me because I’ve seen, I’ve seen too much. I mean, ya know, I hate to say that sometimes I don’t trust my Government, but sometimes, I don’t trust the Government. The bureaucracy. Ya know the best evidence of that is we had the, uh, Tillman, the football player. Joined the army, he was killed. We now find out that the army burned his clothing. So the family never got to get the real story about how Pat Tillman died. Now if it was an accident, so be it. You don’t hide that information because somebody is going to be embarrassed.

That’s the whole story with Tony Shaffer. It’s the bureaucrats trying to hide information and facts, so they’re not embarrassed. So, do I automatically accept what the Government tells me? No. And that’s why I get myself in trouble. I challenge the CIA, I challenge the DIA. I’ll challenge our Defense Department. That’s why you send me there. If you want somebody to go there, and just go along, you would send a robot. That would vote the way the party wanted, and would go along with the current President. I won’t do that. So I’m absolutely open to any information anyone has that challenges anything about the 9/11 Commission or the work there.

Dave Slesinger speaks up: Congressman, that was my question, I, wanna give out, anybody who wants this, this is a speech by a physics professor at BYU, Steven Jones.

Rep. Weldon: Yea.

Dave Slesinger: It’s the hottest thing happening on the 9/11 issue. In his speech, he praises Congressman Weldon, he’s a conservative Republican [or was], he praises Reagan, he quotes St. Paul. I think I have [DVD copies] enough for everybody. Just ask me.

Rep. Weldon: It’ll open your eyes, because his allegations are pretty strong.

[UVSC Presentation on Feb. 1, 2006, by Prof. Jones is available in various formats:

http://www.911blogger.com/2006/02/dr-steven-jones-utah-seminar-video.html

checktheevidence.com/911/BYUStevenJones .]

Post Modified: 05/05/06 22:16:34

R159359
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Bringing It All Back Home

Dr. Morgan Reynolds

Come Out of the White House with Your Hands Up!
Kevin Barrett, 07.05.2006 13:06

Ex-Bush Official Busts 9/11 Perps at U.W. Historical Society

Madison, WI
Saturday, May 6, 2006

An enthusiastic standing-room-only crowd packed the Wisconsin Historical Society auditorium Saturday to hear ex-Bush Administration insider Morgan Reynolds prosecute top administration and military officials for the 9/11 inside job.

Reynolds to Cheney: “You’re BUSTED!”

Reynolds indicted Richard Cheney, George W. Bush, former Joint Chiefs Chairman Richard Meyers, confessed WTC demolisher and insurance-fraudster Larry Silverstein, and others for mass murder, conspiracy, and other charges including high treason. The enthusiastic response from the overflow crowd was a de facto vote for conviction on all counts.

The former Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis, showed that the defendants conspired to create a false cover story of suicide hijackings in order to “blow the World Trade Center to kingdom come” with explosives—a shock-and-awe psy-op designed to coerce the American people into supporting a pre-planned “long war” in the Middle East, massive increases in military spending, and the rollback of Constitutional civil liberties.

Reynolds stated that everyone in the worldwide intelligence community knew that 9/11 was an inside job as soon as it happened, with the obvious stand-down of US air defenses, controlled demolition of the World Trade Center, and non-protection of the President in Florida being the biggest tip-offs. The head of the Russian equivalent of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the former head of the German intelligence service Andreas Von Bulow, former National Security Agency official Wayne Madsen, and former MI-6 agent David Schayler have all openly called 9/11 an inside job, while former CIA official Ray McGovern has confirmed this directly in private, and indirectly in public by way of his ringing endorsement of David Ray Griffin’s work on 9/11.

Reynolds, who served as George W. Bush’s Labor Department Chief Economist in 2001-2002, believes that a 9/11 truth victory is looming on the near-term horizon. He predicted that one or more of the 9/11 insiders will soon “give it up” and come forward with what they know, saying “Remember, you heard it here first.” He said that most of those complicit in the attacks did not realize how over-the-top the plot was, due to the need-to-know compartmentalization of such covert operations, and that some semi-complicit individuals will probably be coming forward. Reynolds said that most of his email acquaintances are now worried that the 9/11 truth movement is going to win, triggering the greatest Constitutional crisis in U.S. history. For Reynolds, this is less a cause for worry than for rejoicing: “We need a Constitutional crisis!”

Reynolds argued that 9/11 truth is a matter of extreme urgency, since the perpetrators seem to be preparing another 9/11-style terror hoax as a pretext for attacking Iran with nuclear weapons. He said that exposing the 9/11 fraud is the best way to stop Cheney’s plan to stage an unprovoked nuclear attack on Iran, and the military draft and Pinochet-style prison camps and death squads for dissenters that might accompany it.

Reynolds urged the audience to help educate the American public about the 9/11 inside job. Personal contact with family and friends, the internet, alternative media, and public events like this are all good educational strategies, he said, adding that a demonstration of 100,000 9/11 truth supporters at Ground Zero next year would be hard for the media to ignore.

Politicians and the media will help expose the 9/11 inside job, he said, only after the growing grassroots movement reaches critical mass. The organizers of Reynolds’ talk urged audience members to come to the upcoming international 9/11 truth conference in Chicago, 9/11: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future, June 2nd-4th, 2006: http://911revealingthetruth.org


Introduction to Dr. Reynolds Presentation

(delivered in much abbreviated form due to time constraints)

by Dr. Kevin Barrett
Coordinator, Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth: http://mujca.com
Member, Scholars for 9/11 Truth: http://st911.org
Member, Scientific Professionals Investigating 9/11 (SPINE): http://911physics.net

Friends, we are gathered here today not just to speak truth to power, but to start fighting back. The information you are hearing today is political dynamite. It is the stuff of which revolutions are made.

Evil rulers use divide-and-conquer strategies against their subjects. In Iraq, the occupiers blow up mosques and markets, and murder thousands of bystanders, in a lame attempt to provoke a Sunni-Shia civil war. But they’re not fooling anybody. The Iraqis all know who’s really doing these bombings, just as 90% of the Arab and Muslim world knows that 9/11 was an inside job. Here in Ersatz America, our criminal rulers are trying to divide us by whipping up emotional hysteria: abortion, immigration, gay marriage, liberal versus conservative, religious versus secular, Christian and Jewish versus Muslim—anything to distract us and keep us from seeing what they’re doing to all of us.

9/11 truth unites ALL of us – left and right, gay and straight, religious, spiritual and secular, Muslim, Christian and Jewish, military and civilian – in revolutionary outrage against this evil regime, and in determination to overthrow it by any means necessary.

We hope the 9/11 truth revolution will be a nonviolent revolution. We are starting with education, symbolism, and nonviolent action. Please honor the request of Veterans for 9/11 Truth ( http://v911t.org) to fly the American flag upside down as a symbol of Constitutional distress. And please come to Chicago for the international 9/11 truth strategy conference June 2nd – 4th, sponsored by 911truth.org and the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth. Posters are available at the table outside. We are meeting in Chicago to figure out how to win on 9/11 truth. And we are going to win. See: http://911revealingthetruth.org

And when we win, the brave man we have invited here today will get a big chunk of the credit.

Dr. Morgan Reynolds is Professor Emeritus at Texas A & M University. He served as Chief Economist in the Department of Labor under George W. Bush during the Cheney regime’s first illegitimate term. He is the former director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and appeared on innumerable political discussion shows in the mainstream media – back when we used to have a mainstream media rather than a Ministry of Propaganda. I’m sorry, I shouldn’t say that – it’s the Ministry of Love. Wait a minute, that’s the one that runs Abu Ghraib and the sex torture gulag. Or is that der Ministry of Unheimlich Insecurity? I’m sorry, I grew up back when we had something vaguely resembling a democracy –I can’t keep all this stuff straight. In any case, Dr. Reynolds has a stellar resume, and the best part of it is that he is a Wisconsin Badger with three degrees from this great university – and he is living up to its motto, The Truth Will Set You Free! Ladies and gentlemen, Dr. Morgan Reynolds.

source

Post Modified: 05/07/06 20:25:17

R160687
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Surely the Hand Of Allah

(submitted by a reader)

If one accepts the “Official Version” of the events that occurred on 9/11 or in the days leading up to it, one can only conclude that a series of Miracles occurred suggesting the hand of higher powers.

I am struck by the similarities between a 9/11 and the events of “The Iliad” wherein a Pantheon of Gods battled one another by proxy by choosing Champions amongst the Greeks and Trojans and interceding on their behalf with various “Miracles”.

I felt it would be interesting to see which “Gods” manifested themselves at or around 9/11 , the nature of that manifestation and which of the various “Gods” won each particular battle.

The Miracle

19 Terrorists gain entry into the United States of America. Not only are none of them turned back at the borders but their entry is made easier with GW Bush changing the Visa requirements shortly before for Saudi citizens. Much of the paperwork they fill out is incomplete and many that gained entry are on intelligence agencies “Terror Lists”. This even after the US Government received a number of warnings regarding a desire by Al Qaeda to launch attacks within America.

Surely the “Hand Of Allah”

The Miracle

These 19 terrorists are under the surveillance of various agents of the United States Government. All of these are called off at the last moment with Agents in Chicago and Miami and Phoenix all ignored by higher authorities when they raise questions about the presence of the various terrorists within the United States. Investigations are actively blocked or impeded.

Surely the “Hand of Allah”

The Miracle

On the day of the Hijackings none of the 19 terrorists are discovered as they bring “Box Cutters axes and Guns onto the planes” All use fake names it seems as none appear on any official passenger list. Any one of these could have been discovered getting onto the planes which might well have lead to the unraveling of the entire plot.

Surely the “Hand Of Allah”

The Miracle

One the day of the hi-jackings the US Government is running drills with its Air Force where it is simulating “Multiple Hijackings of Aircraft” within the United States of America. This drill causes great confusion amongst Air Traffic Controllers as it provides “Cover” for the real Hijackings. Without these drills it is very possible that the Aircraft that were hijacked could have been intercepted far earlier. Certainly one has to consider this some sort of “Miracle”

Surely “The hand of Allah”

The Miracle

Months prior to the hijackings the US Government changes the rules of engagement for hijacked Aircraft. Now in order to send up planes to intercept, the approval of the Defense Secretary, one Donald Rumsfeld is required. Unfortunately he goes missing for 30 minutes again impeding the ability of intercepts to be flown. Not only this but on the day of those Intercepts US Fighter Aircraft that are scrambled suddenly have a top speed of only some 200 MPH.

Surely “The Hand Of Allah”

The Miracle

The US President is on a pre-scheduled event in Florida. The Government has no idea of how many Aircraft have been hijacked or what the targets of the hijackers are. The President himself might well be a target yet rather then bring him to safety the Secret Service is certain the President not at risk. The President insists on finishing his story about goats. A miracle of faith if anything.

Surely “The Hand of God”

The Miracle

5 Israeli Citizens manage to be across the river from the WTC towers and are in place to film the planes crashing into the towers. Great is their Joy as they realize that the United States will certainly discover that Al Qaeda is the Culprit and this will lead to the destruction of Israel’s many enemies. How they came to be there, certainly a miracle and that it lead to the destruction of the hated Iraqis even more so.

Surely “the Hand Of Yahweh”

The Miracle

No steel framed buildings had ever suffered total structural collapse due to fires, yet on this single day, within hours of one another 3 buildings indeed collapse after fires burn through them. This even after Firefighters claim to have had the fires under control.

Surely “the Hand of Allah”

The Miracle

Shortly before 9/11 the WTC center of buildings is leased by an investor who has the foresight to insure them against terrorist attacks. The buildings were never seen as being profitable yet to destroy them and rebuild them by conventional means would have been prohibitively expensive. Surely a Miracle as the Investor made billions from the Insurance Companies

Surely “The hand of Mammom”

The Miracle

Millions in profits are made off put options shortly before 9/11 wherein investors made millions betting that certain stocks would fall in value over the next few days. These included stocks in various Airlines that would suffer most from 9/11.

Surely “The Hand of Mammon”

This is only a small sampling of the Miracles of 9/11. Any that do not believe in that higher powers did not have a hand in this are surely blinded.The number of coincidences that occurred in those few days is mind boggling. Passports surviving fires and found blocks away and belonging to terrorists, the Miracle of a bag that did not get onto the flight that included the names and details of every hijacker. Persons receiving warnings out of the ether not to fly on that day. Cell phones suddenly working where they had never worked before along with people recording their calls. People barely trained in flying aircraft performing miraculous corkscrew maneuvers in Jumbo Aircraft!


R160715
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Excellent summary, Suitcaseman. Good reading.


R160727
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

I was just wondering where you were earlier today, it is not mine, I got it from 911 Blogger, turns out it is a reader, who sent it here


R161294
4 years ago
Continuity

Nice


R161414
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Vermont Green Party is the first political party in the nation to demand the impeachment of Bush and Cheney for the 9/11 crimes

The Vermont Green Party is the first political party in the nation to demand the impeachment of Bush and Cheney for the 9/11 crimes, which a growing minority are convinced were an inside operation, and not an attack by “Al Qaeda.”

The crisis of a trumped-up nuclear attack on Iran is separating the real progressives from the beltway bandits — sifting those who know 9/11 Truth is the issue that can stop the unjust wars and save the republic, from the fake, corrupt opposition who go along with the show. (See our last press release, “Publisher Sees Only One Way to Stop War on Iraq, Iran: Thru 9/11 Truth,” http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/5/prweb378225.htm )

Vermont Green Craig Hill, a Senate candidate, his party secretary Bruce Marshall, and New York Green Party Senate candidate Sander Hicks will make their case for impeachment for 9/11 and election theft on Webster Tarpley’s World Crisis Radio this Saturday on RBNLive.com from 1 to 4 pm EDT — archived at http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Tarpley06.html .

9-11 Blogger
...

Post Modified: 05/11/06 22:45:26

R161678
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime

an independent film

Premiering at The Tribeca Screening* Room *Co-founded in 1989 by Robert DeNiro and Jane Rosenthal

To be followed by a Town Hall Meeting

7:00 PM – May 8, 2006 – 375 Greenwich Street, NYC

Attendance by RSVP only: EverybodyRSVP@Yahoo.com

(This film will not be released online until after this premier)

Largely ignored by the mainstream media, many of the disturbing facts surrounding the attacks of 9/11 raise deeply ethical questions associated with issues of accountability, justice and censorship in America.

Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime may very well be the most compelling film yet outlining the disturbing and heavily censored facts associated with the worst terrorist attacks in American history. And while a grassroots movement worldwide continues to grow, and demand answers to the many unanswered questions, the public outcry for accountability and transparency makes this film, perhaps, the most important film of 2006.

Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime is a free movie, produced by an independent artist, for educational and journalistic purposes only. Any proceeds derived from this premier event will go towards allaying the costs of presenting this film in the light of day, in New York City, in what is left of a free America in Tribeca.

We are making such material available in our efforts to advance the general public’s understanding of political, human rights, and social justice issues, under the definition of ‘fair use’ as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. The material on this site is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes only.

9-11 Blogger

video

Post Modified: 05/13/06 10:28:58

R162225
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

MEDIA HIDE TRUTH; 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB

Last Saturday, former Bush administration official Morgan Reynolds drew an enthusiastic capacity crowd to the Wisconsin Historical Society auditorium. It is probably the first time in Historical Society history that a political talk has drawn a full house on a Saturday afternoon at the beginning of final exams.
...
Normally, if a prestigious UW alumnus and ex-Bush administration official were to come to the Wisconsin Historical Society to spill the beans about a Bush administration scandal, it would make the news. The local TV stations would cover it, and it would merit front page headlines in The Capital Times and Wisconsin State Journal.
...
Despite the prestigious speaker and venue, and the gravity of the charges aired, for most Americans indeed most Madisonians the event never happened. Why? Because it was censored, subjected to a total media blackout. Not a word in the State Journal. Not a word in The Capital Times. Not a word on the local TV news. Not a word on local radio news. And, of course, not a word in the national media.

Why the blackout? Because Reynolds violated the ultimate U.S. media taboo. He charges the Bush administration with orchestrating the 9/11 attacks as a pretext for launching a preplanned “long war” in the Middle East, rolling back our civil liberties, and massively increasing military spending.

When a former Bush administration insider makes such charges, how can the media ignore them? Is Reynolds a lone crank? Hardly. A long list of prominent Americans have spoken out for 9/11 truth: Rev. William Sloane Coffin, Sen. Barbara Boxer, former head of the Star Wars program Col. Robert Bowman, ex-Reagan administration economics guru Paul Craig Roberts, progressive Jewish author-activist Rabbi Michael Lerner, former CIA official Ray McGovern, author-essayist Gore Vidal, and many other respected names from across the political spectrum have gone on the record for 9/11 truth.
...
As a Watergate-era graduate of the University of Wisconsin School of Journalism, I was taught that exposing government lies and corruption is the supreme duty of the Fourth Estate. I simply cannot fathom the current situation. I do not understand the 9/11 truth blackout. I wish someone would explain it to me.

It is time to break the 9/11 truth blackout. Please put pressure on your local media through letters to the editor, call-ins to talk radio, and phone calls to local and national journalists.

Kevin Barrett

Post Modified: 05/13/06 22:42:31

R162590
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Press Release – May 8, 2006
Contact: Ed Haas (843) 388-6158
http://www.teamliberty.net

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Civilian Debate Team selected to debate government account of 9/11

The National 9/11 Debate™ is pleased to announce that Philip Berg, James Fetzer, David Ray Griffin, Steven Jones, Morgan Reynolds, George Nelson, and Judy Wood have agreed to participate in the National 9/11 Debate on September 16, 2006 in Charleston, South Carolina. Members of the 9/11 Commission, government scientists from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and other supporting experts are anticipated to participate and represent the government’s debate team.

Philip J. Berg, Esquire is a Former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania, and the attorney for plaintiffs in 9-11 RICO Suit vs. Bush. His web site, 911forthetruth.com covers the RICO lawsuit against Bush, Cheney, and 53 other defendants in Federal Court.

James H. Fetzer a Distinguished McKnight University Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota, Duluth, a former Marine Corps officer, the author or editor of 27 books, and founder and co-chairman of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

David Ray Griffin is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy and Theology at the Claremont Graduate School, where he taught for over 30 years, retiring in 2004. He has authored or edited over thirty books, including “The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11” and “Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11”.

Steven E. Jones is the co-chairman of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a Professor of Physics at Brigham Young University, an expert in cold fusion and solar energy who earned his Ph.D. at Vanderbilt, and who has authored an influential study of the collapse of the Twin Towers (WTC-1, WTC-2).

George Nelson, Colonel, USAF (retired) is a trained aircraft accident investigator who served as an Aircraft Maintenance Manager for more than 30 years and who was assigned additional duties as a member of aircraft accident investigation teams for the United States Air Force.

Morgan Reynolds is a Professor Emeritus of Economics at Texas A&M. He is the former Chief Economist for the Department of Labor for President George W. Bush. He is also the former Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis. In June 2005, Lew Rockwell published Reynolds’ article: Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse?

Judy D. Wood is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University with degrees in Civil Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, and Materials Engineering Science. Professor Wood teaches courses in the areas of engineering mechanics and experimental stress analysis.

The structure of the National 9/11 Debate will include a credentialed seven-member debate team that supports the government’s account of 9/11, a credentialed seven-member debate team that disputes elements of the government’s account, and a seven-member media panel that will monitor the debates and pose questions to the debate team members.

The National 9/11 Debate ? September 16, 2006
Embassy Suites Hotel Airport-Convention Center
5055 International Blvd, N. Charleston, South Carolina, United States 29418
Tel: +1-843-747-1882 Fax: +1-843-747-1895

THE NATIONAL 9/11 DEBATE

Post Modified: 05/14/06 22:06:37

R162592
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

THE NATIONAL 9/11 DEBATE

MUCKRAKER REPORT

Post Modified: 05/15/06 19:01:28

R162593
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

double post

Post Modified: 05/14/06 22:09:49

R162687
4 years ago
GodUnderSiege

My life project: to read this thread in its whole. Talk to you all in three years!


R162708
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

There is a lot of repetition.


R162772
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Good luck, GUS.

What a great guerrilla concept – organize 9/11 debate teams everywhere to challenge the debate teams of local colleges and high schools. The teachers would feel safe by having their teams defend the pro-gov version and meanwhile everybody gets educated.


R162773
4 years ago
Snark

Oh jeez….next time this thing dies, can y’all just let it die? This is about the tenth time that it’s been buried for days and then somebody gets the ball rolling again.


R162777
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

For years, Bob Dylan has been on what they call “the neverending tour”, this is the neverending 911 Forum Thread.

It is a bulletin board, for the latest 9-11 news.

Feel free to contribute.

Post Modified: 05/15/06 11:34:03


R162780
4 years ago
Snark

Well, somebody better clue Valis in then.

And just what is there in the way of new “news” on 9/11, besides the same old discussions?


R162782
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

The news is that there is going to be a 911 Debate in September.


R162784
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Nobody likes the guerrilla debate team concept?

“This is the thread that never ends
It just goes on and on, my friends!
Some people started typing it, not knowing what it was;
Now they’ll continue typing it forever just because…

This is the thread that never ends
It just goes on and on, my friends!
Some people started typing it, not knowing what it was;
Now they’ll continue typing it forever just because…


R162785
4 years ago
Snark

Erm, and that would be different from every 9/11 thread on GNN ever…...how?

Post Modified: 05/15/06 11:43:59

R162795
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

Erm, and that would be different from every 9/11 thread on GNN ever…...how?

Um, the 9/11 truthies are gonna have “experts” like, um, a theology professor.


R162801
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Re-read.


R162805
4 years ago
whateveryousay

snark:


R162806
4 years ago
whateveryousay

“Almost anything can be attacked as a failure, but almost anything can be defended as not a significant failure. Politicians do no appreciate the significance of ‘significant’. “


R162808
4 years ago
whateveryousay

“The Official Secrets Act is not to protect secrets, it is to protect officials.”


R162810
4 years ago
Snark

Ah, something sinister must be afoot.

And suitcase- I meant in content.


R162814
4 years ago
whateveryousay

“It is only totalitarian governments that suppress facts. In this country we simply take a democratic decision not to publish them.”


R162816
4 years ago
whateveryousay

Stage One: Refuse to publish in the public interest saying 1. There are security considerations. 2. The findings could be misinterpreted. 3. You are waiting for the results of a wider and more detailed report which is still in preparation. (If there isn’t one, commission it; this gives you even more time).


R162817
4 years ago
whateveryousay

Stage Two: Discredit the evidence you are not publishing, saying 1. It leaves important questions unanswered. 2. Much of the evidence is inconclusive. 3. The figures are open to other interpretations. 4. Certain findings are contradictory. 5. Some of the main conclusions have been questioned. (If they haven’t, question them yourself; then they have).


R162818
4 years ago
whateveryousay
Stage Three: Undermine the recommendations. Suggested phrases: 1. ‘Not really a basis for long term decisions’. 2. ‘Not sufficient information on which to base a valid assessment’. 3. ‘No reason for any fundamental rethink of existing policy’. 4. ‘Broadly speaking, it endorses current practice’.

R162819
4 years ago
whateveryousay

Stage Four: Discredit the person who produced the report. Explain (off the record) that
1. He is harbouring a grudge against the Department.
2. He is a publicity seeker.
3. He is trying to get a Knighthood/Chair/Vice Chancellorship.
4. He used to be a consultant to a multinational.
5. He wants to be a consultant to a multinational.

Post Modified: 05/15/06 12:46:09

R162821
4 years ago
whateveryousay

“To suppress an internal government report, rewrite it as official advice to the Minister. Then it is against the rules to publish it, so you can leak the bits you want to friendly journalists.”


R162822
4 years ago
whateveryousay

“A good political speech is not one in which you can prove that the man is telling the truth; it is one where no one else can prove he is lying.”


R162824
4 years ago
whateveryousay

“Politicians speeches are not written for the audience to which they are delivered. Delivering the speech is merely the formality that has to be gone through in order to get the press release into the newspapers.”


R162826
4 years ago
whateveryousay

THE TRUTH:

the best explanation of past events that cannot be disproved by publicly available facts.

Post Modified: 05/15/06 12:53:25

R162833
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

That was incredible. Really fucking incredible. Came along at just the right time.


R162834
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

There is going to be a 9-11 Debate with emphasis on De.


R162835
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

All argument will not be Censored.

Post Modified: 05/15/06 13:14:19

R162842
4 years ago
Chickenma1

So will this debate be available to watch somewhere (besides So. Carolina)? And what about the idea of lots of 9/11 debate teams taking on colleges?


R162878
4 years ago
2PatShakira

Stage Three: Undermine the recommendations. Suggested phrases:
1. ‘Not really a basis for long term decisions’.
2. ‘Not sufficient information on which to base a valid assessment’.
3. ‘No reason for any fundamental rethink of existing policy’.
4. ‘Broadly speaking, it endorses current practice’.
5. Under review, legislation coming soon


R162930
4 years ago
Continuity

I fully support Snark’s right to not read this thread.


R163002
4 years ago
whateveryousay

4. ‘Broadly speaking, it endorses current practice’.

classic


R163113
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

NEW 9/11 WEBSITE TRUTHMOVE.ORG

We are two NYC 9/11 activists, Max and Julian, and we’d like to introduce you to our new website, TruthMove.org. This site will be the centerpiece of a new organization dedicated to promoting consciousness of false history, deception and social control.

We’ve been active in the movement for years, recently working closely with Nick Levis and John Albanese. Through our research and experience, we’ve come to realize that the 9/11 Truth Movement fits within the context of a more general movement to promote informed citizenship, honest journalism, and true democracy.

We believe our website is the first of it’s kind to specifically outline a “Truth Movement.” Our aim is to simplify and popularize the most essential information while providing key resources for further investigation. We cover areas ranging from the environment and election fraud to assassinations, coups, and false flag operations. We also address media complicity and highlight the core issues of values and theory, action, and psychology.

The site is our vision of a Truth Movement. It stems from years of research and our desire to see a more centralized, accessible, and strategic resource for alternative information. We do not claim any ownership of this Truth Movement. The battle for truth and justice is as old as the beginnings of civilization. We are simply sharing our own ideas and hoping to spread curiosity, conversation, and action.

We hope the site will be valuable as an educational resource that draws many progressive interests toward a forum in which we recognize our unified concern for the truth. We see the Truth Movement already well underway, with individuals, groups, and sites like yours, all playing an important part.

We invite you to explore TruthMove and let us know what you think. The site will remain a work in progress, open to addition and revision.

9-11 Blogger

Post Modified: 05/15/06 23:26:44

R163166
4 years ago
whateveryousay

Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) (foreground with gloves) and (from left to right) Felix Grucci (R-NY), Vern Ehlers (R-MI) and Dr. W. Gene Corley, team lead for the FEMA/ASCE Building Performance Study Team, examine a piece of steel from the 100th floor of the North Tower of the World Trade Center.

R164330
4 years ago
YT_

haha


R164368
4 years ago
Schnubster

Basically, so far, I’ve managed to show that the Towers could have fallen three and a half times in the time they actually took, which to my mind is a long way from “free fall.” Not to mention a lot of other fuzzy-mindedness; in fact, so far, I haven’t seen a point I think will stand up to scrutiny. Keep an eye on the thread. You never know, this might be the one- but somehow I think not. ;)


R164374
4 years ago
whateveryousay

schnub,

you know you’re still kind of a jerk for being a jerk and making dumb-bum think i was spamming him…it was you right?

and since his freakout seems to have got him banned… well i kind of miss the rants which kept bumping this beauty front and centre.


R164820
4 years ago
YT_

R164829
4 years ago
tenbob

Cheers for that YT, I almost threw up. Turning tragedy into drama in a way only Hollywood knows how.

At the end of the trailer it says “The World Saw Evil That Day” then “Two Men Saw Something Else”. Hmmm, anyone know what that is?

And on a conspiratorial note. Imagine if the producers recreated the Pentagon attack. Then decided to sell it to the government instead.

Okay…insane…I know!


R164982
4 years ago
YT_

Yeah, I had to stop it halfway through – harshness. I wish Nic Cage would stay in that movie where he belongs and not fuck up Ghost Rider.


R164988
4 years ago
yeshappysteady

Although, I would love to set his head on fire…


R165022
4 years ago
yeshappysteady

I’m totally getting banned again for saying that aren’t I?


R165032
4 years ago
YT_

You should be so lucky. Come to #gnn, ras is there.


R165073
4 years ago
Rasputin

Since it’s the one-year anniversary of this thread I was asked to issue a one liner. I’ll do more:

According to David Ray Griffin, Michael Parenti has finally come out of the IHIOP pancake closet and stated that 911 was an “inside job”. Duh. Garofalo figured that out six months ago. But it’s still refreshing.

Parenti, you’ll recall, is the chap who wrote the article on the “intellectual cowardice” of Noam Chomsky and Alex Cockburn. He was baffled by their stunning (supposed) ignorance of the JFK affair. He emailed them repeatedly, citing fact after fact. Neither C’s responded.

My favorite quote of Parenti’s is the remark he made at a Church in my home town, Vancouver, about “men in rooms”. For some reason, it is supposed, “conspiracies” involving men in suits NEVER take place in “ROOMS”, especially when cigar smoke is involved. Where else? – he posits. While skydiving?

WTC7 fell at free-fall speed. I didn’t learn that until recently. You can make some kind of argument that the building was pre-wired and that they demolished it in order to prevent further loss of life (some of the smarter LIHOPPERS have suggested this, in fact), but it’s still pretty goofy. Almost as goofy as a fire-proof passport, almost as goofy, indeed, as the bag-o’-goodies left by Atta at the airport. (Atta: “Fuck! I knew I forgot something! I should have given my will to my father and not left it in my bag! Oh well I’ll call him tomorrow)

It’s interesting that over at DU (democratic underground) it’s quite acceptable to be a LIHOPPER. The recent thread Anphony posted: “a skeptic’s view” (rebutted by Hoffman, in spades), was allowed to stand in the “open forum” for weeks (along with the “Hillary is dope” stuff), yet anything else 911 related is banished to the “911 dungeon” (as some members are fond of calling it).

LIHOP is safe. It’s for pussies and imbeciles. As I say time and time again, ain’t no way the spooks at the Pentagon would allow a misfit like Hanjour to fly a plane into their building, potentially hitting Rumsfeld while he had his morning donut. Ain’t no way “dumb and dumber” flew a 757 at 500 mph 20 ft above the ground and hit the renolvation wing, accidentally. I could go on and on.

“Member what ‘Cheney said while F97 was still in the air? “An act of heroism” was about to occur. How did he know? ‘Member what Rummy said before the Pentalawn was hit? “It ain’t over yet”. How did he know? ‘Member Cheney in his bunker? “Does the order still stand”? Member Bush in the Classroom? How did he knowt the children were safe?

You’d have to be a complete, drooling idiot to accept LIHOP. I’m sorry, but that’s it.


R165081
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

You’d have to be a complete, drooling idiot to accept LIHOP. I’m sorry, but that’s it.

Great to see you post on this thread that you started so long ago. Yes, I have been thinking the same thing, and it turns the critics of the critics believe the 19 hijacker with box-cutter story, which is just not believable.


R165094
4 years ago
YT_

Haha thanks, Ras. I hadn’t heard that news about Parenti yet, good one. By the way, the one year anniversary of this thread isn’t until next month (surprise, Jessey can’t count) – June 12th to be exact, Poppy Bush’s birthday. I guess you’ll have to post again then.


R165111
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

R165115
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Excerpt

Two weeks after their arrest, the Israelis were still in detention, held on immigration charges. Then a judge ruled that they should be deported. But the CIA scuppered the deal and the five remained in custody for another two months. Some went into solitary confinement, all underwent two polygraph tests and at least one underwent up to seven lie detector sessions before they were eventually deported at the end of November 2001. Paul Kurzberg refused to take a lie detector test for 10 weeks, but then failed it. His lawyer said he was reluctant to take the test as he had once worked for Israeli intelligence in another country.

Sunday Herald

Scotland’s award-winning independent newspaper

Post Modified: 05/18/06 18:09:37

R165117
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

This is a good one,

In the car was $4700 in cash, a couple of foreign passports and a pair of box cutters – the concealed Stanley Knife-type blades used by the 19 hijackers who’d flown jetliners into the World Trade Centre and Pentagon just hours before. There were also fresh pictures of the men standing with the smouldering wreckage of the Twin Towers in the background. One image showed a hand flicking a lighter in front of the devastated buildings, like a fan at a pop concert. The driver of the van then told the arresting officers: “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.”


R165123
4 years ago
YT_

Good ol’ Neil MacKay. He broke the story of PNAC’s desire for a new Pearl Harbor and a couple of other really good ones, too.


R165126
4 years ago
Dubya

it wasn’t a plane nor was it a missile. it was one seriously-fucking-dangerous nose-cone. ;) saw it right there on the right hand side. clear as mud.

it hit the recently renovated (to impregnate the facade with kevlar??) wing of the pentagon (hmmm) as if it had been dialed in for surgical precision point accuracy.

yep.


R165243
4 years ago
YT_

Hey Dub, perhaps you were looking for this thread or this one.


R165253
4 years ago
YT_

Someone just sent me this video of eyewitness testimony from the WTC.


R165470
4 years ago
smartrthnIused2b

i no its not WTC info but it is related

hey folks, this is my first post on GNN, i have been reading for 4 years now, always interesting and fun,

just thought i pass this along it is an interview with ben sliney on chud.com. he was the guy who grounded all flights FAA operations manager sept 11, 2001. inthe interview he states that UA flight 93 had been at 5000 feet “...for a long time”

make your own conclusions but it is quite telling ( i dont know how to hyperlink so just cut paste) but it was also his first day

http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=interviews&id=6517

thanks

smarter than i used to be


R165474
4 years ago
YT_

Damn, they took the eyewitness video off youtube. That sucks.


R165493
4 years ago
YT_

Fuck, I’m bummed out about that video disappearing before I could figure out how to save the youtube format. I hope it turns up again somewhere. Anyway, here’s a brand new video focusing on the towers. It’s an hour and a half long in wmv format. Haven’t had a chance to watch it yet.


R165950
4 years ago
YT_

It turns out the clip of the wtc eyewitness is part of a project that a group in NYC is doing and they don’t want it in circulation until they secure an in-depth interview. I hope it turns up again soon, it’s pretty hardcore.


R165952
4 years ago
yeshappysteady

Well that’s cool I guess, at least it isn’t gone for good.


R165958
4 years ago
YT_

I’m glad someone else saw it.

keepvid.com is for saving youtube videos.


R165961
4 years ago
aaron

I saw it too, YT.
It was awesome, except for when the wind picked up toward the end. Got a bit muffled then. I can see why they’d want a better version of the interview.


R166132
4 years ago
YT_

Cool, glad you saw it too, aaron. I hope they hurry up with their project.

bomb in the building start clearing out


R166284
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Verry interesting – thanks, guys.


R166422
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

The Times-Herald Covers 9/11 Skeptics, Jon Gold and David Ray Griffin

While the 9/11 Commission Report inquiry has its share of critics, Jonathan Gold’s misgivings about the official findings go far beyond skepticism. In fact, the 33-year-old Plymouth Meeting resident is convinced the report is covering up Bush administration complicity in the deadly terrorist attacks.

Gold’s unorthodox view has caused many jaws to drop and heads to shake. When asked for proof, he calmly rattles off a long list of like-minded people, and what he called a growing body of “evidence” that the government orchestrated the attacks as a pretext for the global war on terror.

“There’s so much evidence out there,” he said.

For those who scoff at him, he recommends comparing the official Sept. 11 account to the Cooperative Research Center’s Sept. 11 times lines, reading David Griffin’s “The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions” and entries on 911Truth.org just for starters.

A quick glance at the Internet’s voluminous material critical of the 9/11 Commission Report published in 2004 could be this generation’s Warren Report.

Gold was not always a skeptic, admitting his conversion to Sept. 11 truth seeker was a gradual process. But by 2002, he was convinced the official story was a monumental cover-up.

His suspicion grew with the Bush administration’s initial reluctance to cooperate with a probe into the Sept. 11 attacks, and when former Sen. Tom Daschle was asked to limit the scope of the investigation.

Considering nearly 3,000 people had been killed, Gold was irked it took the Sept. 11 survivors – dubbed “The Jersey Girls” – 441 days to persuade the administration to hold public hearings on the disaster.

“If you had a loved one murdered, would you want the police to wait to investigate the crime,” he asked.

There are still too many unanswered questions and inconsistencies, according to 911Truth.org, an advocacy group that wants to expose what its media coordinator Mike Berger called “the government’s official conspiracy theory” that took the nation to war.

“The reason we are doing this is, we believe the attacks were used to justify our unpopular foreign policy decisions,” Berger said.

As a member of 9/11 Truth’s steering committee, Gold spent many hours on the Internet reading about the disaster and writing for his online bulletin board, yourbbsuck.com, but eventually gave up the committee duties because it was too time consuming.

The truth adherent’s views vary, Gold said, but many believe that the World Trade Center towers were rigged with explosives to ensure their collapse, that the Pentagon may have been hit by a missile instead of an airliner and that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville after it was shot down.

“I believe it was shot down,” Gold said.

The 9/11 Truth site questions why the U.S. air defense system failed to intercept the airliner that struck the Pentagon, and why Bush lingered at the Florida school after hearing of the Trade Center was hit. Some say the president’s dawdling is just more proof that he had prior knowledge of the attacks.

Griffin, a retired professor Claremont School of Theology in California, studied the day’s timelines and the official report, and concluded jet fighters that should have scrambled within minutes to intercept the hijacked planes were ordered not to take off.

By the time F-16 jets from Langley Air Force Base, in Hampton, Va., were in the air at 9:30 a.m., it was too late to pursue Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon eight minutes later. The base is more than 100 miles from Pentagon.

Though the 9/11 Report details delays and confused communications between the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) during the hijackings, Griffin sees something sinister.

“I was struck by the contradictions of why there were no (fighter jet) interceptions,” Griffin said. “I think it was just an old-fashioned stand down order.”

Justification for allowing the terrorist attacks was foreshadowed, Griffin said, in “Rebuilding America’s Defense,” written in 2000 by the neo-conservative group, Project for The New American Century.

The project’s members included Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and current United Nations ambassador John Bolton.

“It’s kind of scary when you think about it, because these are the people now in power,” Gold said.

Griffin said the “neo-cons” anticipated going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq long before the Sept. 11 attacks to ensure a steady supply of oil.

“This was a perfect fit for a neo-conservative plot … to get absolute military authority,” he said.

Temple University psychology professor Frank Farley called the Sept. 11 skeptics’ notions ridiculous.

“It just doesn’t pass the test of reasonableness,” he said.

Government conspiracy myths have a long history in popular culture, Farley said, but now kooky ideas spread like wildfire with the millions of Internet users online and few qualified authorities to vet outrageous claims.

“The Internet just feeds (conspiracy claims),” he said. “In a world of information overload, it’s getting harder and harder to separate the wheat from the chaff.”

Farley predicted the explosion of misinformation would only get worse over time. Spencer Meredith, a political science professor at New York’s Rochester Institute of Technology, was more optimistic.

“The impact of this is negligible, and long-term it’s marginal,” Meredith said.

People who believe the government is malicious and highly capable of wrongdoing are more inclined to buy into Sept. 11 conspiracy theories, Meredith said.

“It starts with a mistrust of government,” he said. “They don’t like Bush.”

For anyone doubting Flight 77 didn’t crash into the Pentagon, Arlington County Fire Department Chief Scott McKay begs to differ. He and Arlington firefighters were the first on the disaster scene on Sept. 11 and worked on shoring up the collapsed structure.

“Inside the building, there was a (airline) nose gear with wheels and passenger seats,” he said, as well as human remains.

As for the World Trade Center towers, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) spent more than three years analyzing the collapses, according to Michael Newman, a NIST spokesman, and published its “Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Towers” in 2005.

To perform the evaluation, the federal agency used 236 pieces of steel from the ground zero site, studied thousands of video and still pictures of the catastrophe and simulated the impacts and fires in several laboratories.

The study concluded that the airliners’ extreme impacts severed the buildings’ perimeter support columns, and the subsequent fires weakened other exposed steel.

“(The crashes) dislodged so much of the fire-proofing material (on the supports), that it left a lot of steel vulnerable to the fire,” Newman said.

If the fire-proofing had not been torn away, the towers would have remained standing, he said.

The NIST report did not find any evidence that the towers had been sabotaged with explosives, as 911 Truth advocates have suggested.

“These folks have a right to their opinion,” Newman said. “But we spent three-and-a-half years on the investigation and wrote recommendations, and we stand behind them.”

Keith Phucas can be reached at kphucas@timesherald.com or 610-272-2500, ext. 211.

Congratulations to Jon Gold for putting forth the effort to get his local paper to cover the subject matter!

Post Modified: 05/20/06 23:46:20

R166426
4 years ago
Chickenma1

I love the way people say it “doesn’t pass the test of reasonableness”. As if anything has passed the test of reasonableness since Bush got into office.


R166429
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

But you left out the best part, this Temple University psychology professor Frank Farley had more to say,

Government conspiracy myths have a long history in popular culture, Farley said, but now kooky ideas spread like wildfire with the millions of Internet users online and few qualified authorities to vet outrageous claims.

And he adds, this new fear that everybody should have of the internet,

“The Internet just feeds (conspiracy claims),” he said. “In a world of information overload, it’s getting harder and harder to separate the wheat from the chaff.”
Farley predicted the explosion of misinformation would only get worse over time.


R166430
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

It seems to be very popular to attack the 9-11 Truth Movement lately. Oh what fun it is to ride in a one-horse open sleigh.

Post Modified: 05/21/06 00:10:48

R166440
4 years ago
Continuity

YT, that new movie was really good.


R166799
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Video of the Pentagon Attack: What is the Government Hiding?

by Jim Hoffman

Excerpt

Today [May 16, 2006], the DOD released two videos from Pentagon security cameras, through JudicialWatch.org. One of the videos includes the five frames leaked in 2002. The new frames, including several from a different camera, add almost nothing to the body of public evidence about the Pentagon attack on 9/11/01. Since the new videos don’t show an airplane, they promise to fuel debates about what hit the Pentagon, rather than put them to rest.


R167016
4 years ago
neverknwo

R167295
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Zogby Poll Finds Over 70 Million Voting Age Americans Support New 9/11 Investigation

May 22, 2006

NEW ZOGBY POLL REVEALS OVER 70 MILLION VOTING AGE AMERICANS DISTRUST OFFICIAL 9/11 STORY AND SUPPORT NEW INVESTIGATION OF POSSIBLE US GOVERNMENT ROLE IN THE ATTACKS.

- 911Truth.org urges 2006 reform candidates to recognize a powerful new constituency.

(Utica, NY) – Although the Bush administration continues to exploit September 11 to justify domestic spying, unprecedented spending and a permanent state of war, a new Zogby poll reveals that less than half of the American public trusts the official 9/11 story or believes the attacks were adequately investigated.

The poll is the first scientific survey of Americans’ belief in a 9/11 cover up or the need to investigate possible US government complicity, and was commissioned to inform deliberations at the June 2-4 “9/11: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future” conference in Chicago. Poll results indicate 42% believe there has indeed been a cover up (with 10% unsure) and 45% think “Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success” (with 8% unsure). The poll of American residents was conducted from Friday, May 12 through Tuesday, May 16, 2006. Overall results have a margin of sampling error of +/- 2.9. All inquiries about questions, responses and demographics should be directed to Zogby International.

According to Janice Matthews, executive director of 911truth.org, “To those who have followed the mounting evidence for US government involvement in 9/11, these results are both heartening and frankly quite amazing, given the mainstream media’s ongoing refusal to cover the most critical questions of that day. Our August 2004 Zogby poll of New Yorkers showed nearly half believe certain US officials ‘consciously’ allowed the attacks to happen and 66% want a fresh investigation, but these were people closest to the tragedy and most familiar with facts refuting the official account. This revelation that so many millions nationwide now also recognize a 9/11 cover up and the need for a new inquiry should be a wake up call for all 2006 political candidates hoping to turn this country around. We think it also indicates Americans are awakening to the larger pattern of deceit that led us into Constitutional twilight and endless war, and that our independent media may have finally come of age.”

Poll co-author, W. David Kubiak concurs, saying: “Despite years of relentless media promotion, whitewash and 9/11 Commission propaganda, the official 9/11 story still can’t even muster 50% popular support. Since this myth has been the administration’s primary source of political and war-making power, this level of distrust has revolutionary implications for everyone working for peace, justice and civil liberties. If we ever hope to reclaim this country, end aggression and restore international respect, we all must finally scrutinize that day when things started to go so terribly wrong. The media and movement leaders ignore this call at their peril, because tens of millions are clearly telling us here they are ready for 9/11 truth.”

SCOPE: The poll covered five related areas: 1) Iraq – do Americans think the Bush administration exploited 9/11 to attack Iraq? (44% do, 44% don’t); 2) Cover up – did the government and its 9/11 Commission conceal or refuse to investigate evidence that contradicts their official story? (only 48% said no); 3) The collapse of WTC 7, which was not even mentioned by the 9/11 Commission and has seldom been reported in the media—-were respondents aware of this collapse and, if so, did they think it should be investigated (only 52% knew about it, but over 70% of this group believe it should have been investigated); 4) new investigation of official complicity – do respondents think we need one? (only 48% said no); and 5) mass media – how do people rate its performance, including its coverage of alternative 9/11 theories, unanswered questions and inquiry issues? (43% rate it positively, 55% negatively).

(The poll sponsors see knowledge of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 as a bellwether issue, because if people do not know this elementary fact, they have probably not been exposed to any independent 9/11 research at all. Since only 52% of respondents had ever heard of this collapse and 45% support a reinvestigation, it may be reasonably inferred that a public fully informed of all the unreported 9/11 facts might support a new investigation by a margin of 80% or more.)

SPONSOR: 911truth.org is a coalition of researchers, journalists and victim family members working to expose and answer the hundreds of still unresolved questions concerning 9/11, especially the nearly 400 questions that the Family Steering Committee filed with the 9/11 Commission. Initially welcomed by the commissioners as their “road map,” these queries cut to the heart of 9/11 crimes and accountability, specifically raising the central issues of motive, means and cui bono (who profited?). The Commission ultimately ignored 80% of these issues, however, opting only to explore system failures, miscommunications and incompetence. The victim families’ most incisive questions remain unaddressed to this day.

For more information on the Chicago “9/11: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming our Future” conference and other developments, see www.911truth.org and http://911revealingthetruth.org or contact our media coordinator, Michael Berger, at 314-308-4893 or press@911truth.org.

*Numerical computations conservatively based on 2000 Census data citing 174 million Americans between the ages of 18 and 64. NOTE: Given US Census Bureau data projecting 184 million Americans between the ages of 18 and 64 in 2005, the actual number of Americans who distrust the official 9/11 story is, then, over 80 million.

911Truth

Post Modified: 05/22/06 23:57:04

R167417
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

R167501
4 years ago
yeshappysteady

WTC Building Obstacle to Ground Zero Plans

By AMY WESTFELDT , 05.23.2006, 02:23 PM

While debates rage about why more buildings have not gone up at the World Trade Center site, there is one, shrouded in a web of black netting and full of trade center dust, that can’t seem to come down.

The vacant 41-story former Deutsche Bank AG building looms above ground zero, contaminated with toxic waste and still holding tiny body parts more than four years after the trade center collapsed onto it on Sept. 11, 2001. Removing it from the landscape has become a more challenging task than cleaning up the twin towers.

“That’s more or less a vertical Superfund site, and we’re living right next to it,” said neighborhood resident Esther Regelson, referring to a federal program for cleaning up the nation’s most polluted industrial sites. She is concerned that taking down the building improperly will contaminate the area even more.

The eyesore presents different problems for a business district struggling to coax companies back to office space destroyed by terrorists. The first rebuilt skyscraper near ground zero, 7 World Trade Center, opened Tuesday with less than one-fifth of its space rented.

“Having it still there isn’t helping,” said Eric Deutch, president of the Alliance for Downtown New York.

Development officials hope to bring down the building over the next year, making way for a new tower that could offer apartments or a hotel. But the cleanup that began last fall has stalled repeatedly as the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulators cited contractors for violations.

Construction workers, helped by the Fire Department, have another, wrenching task as they sift through debris. They have recovered more than 600 tiny bone fragments so far that had not been found in searches of the building shortly after the attacks.

Family groups and four U.S. senators have asked for more thorough sweeps of the area to search for other fragments.

“It would be very foolish for us to think that that’s the only building that had remains on it,” said Diane Horning, who lost her son at the trade center.

Before the cleanup began, the 32-year-old building was embroiled in a legal battle between the company, insurers and the government over who was responsible for it.

The tower lay untouched for months after the collapsing south tower tore into it, leaving a 15-story gash in its facade. The building became infested with mold caused by moisture from fire sprinklers and also contains asbestos, lead, mercury and toxic dust from the trade center.

Deutsche Bank got into court battles with several insurers for payments to help take the building down. It also sued the city for more than $500 million in damages to the tower.

The Lower Manhattan Development Corp., the state agency overseeing rebuilding at ground zero, bought the tower for $90 million two years ago after “the private sector was unable to create a solution,” agency President Stefan Pryor said.

It took another year to begin the cleanup because the agency needed the EPA and others to approve one of the most complex demolition plans in the city’s history.

The LMDC hopes to begin dismantling the building from the top down next month. Once it is gone, in a year or so, officials plan to build the last of five proposed towers to replace the trade center there. Planners may develop it into an apartment complex or hotel.

The cleanup, which began in September, caused immediate controversy when several bone fragments were found on the building’s roof. In recent months, hundreds more were found. Family members of Sept. 11 victims, many of whom never recovered remains of their loved ones, were outraged.

Sen. Charles Schumer became the first of four senators to ask the Defense Department to send a specialized military unit – best known for finding MIAs in Vietnam – to search the area for remains. The Defense Department is open to sending the elite unit, Schumer said, and “we hope the city will allow them.”

At a state hearing on Thursday, Pryor and Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff said the LMDC and city team are doing a thorough job searching and do not need help.

The search for remains, though, was suspended weeks ago after the EPA found that construction workers were sifting for the remains in an asbestos-contaminated area without proper protection. The agency also halted cleanup work for a few days this month after witnessing a contractor taking out debris that had not been thoroughly cleaned.

LMDC spokesman John Gallagher said the agency asked regulators to keep better tabs on the situation to ensure that the cleanup was being properly handled.

EPA spokeswoman Mary Mears said the violation was part of a “pattern” with the cleanup, the fourth problem of its kind in recent weeks. The EPA has questioned the use of a chute to send down debris and other aspects of the cleanup. After shutting down most cleanup work for more than a week, the EPA allowed contractors to begin removing debris from the building on Tuesday.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration and state labor officials have also cited contractors for several violations this year, including an incident in which an employee fell 30 feet in March while building part of a sidewalk canopy system without a harness.

Regelson, who lives directly behind the Deutsche Bank building, said the tower “pretty much saved our lives” on Sept. 11 because it shielded her residence from the south tower’s collapse. But then her asthma worsened, and she developed an acid-reflux problem.

She worries now that taking down the building will spew more pollutants into the air. She is saddened by the discovery of human remains, but said the toxic dust inside the building is more harmful.

“The body parts aren’t going to kill me,” she said.

link


R167732
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

CIAlien put this up on gnn, on the blog page, the movie What’s the Truth

More about this in the future, but for now, it is a good compilation and very well presented, very very strong on the bombs in the buildings aspect.

Post Modified: 05/23/06 23:31:24

R167929
4 years ago
zark

emissary posted this on page 21

awesome video 911 Eyewitness

booom, boom , booom .. on and on.


R167963
4 years ago
2PatShakira

Somebody’s been recently waving around the fact that molten metal was found in the basement as some sort of validation of the as yet unproved theory that jet fuel could have caused the steel inner-core to weaken.

It occured to me that since, according to the statements of one William Roderiguez, there appear to have been fires and explosions in the basement areas ( prior to the plane hitting the tower, btw, if Roderiguez is to be believed) any molten metal found in the basement would more likely have been the result of aforesaid basement fires, than any mythical ‘jet-fuel’ fires burning in unconnected and insulated inner-core conduits (such as lift-shafts that didn’t run the height of the building)

What fuelled those basement fires (which you will remember occured prior to planes hitting the towers) is a mystery. What caused the expolsions is also a mystery.

Neither were even mentioned in that model of probity and attention-to-detail known as the NIST report or even in the more accessible and totally un-nepotistic work of genius known as ‘Popular Mechanics debunks the 9-11 conspiracy theories’

Both events are totally ignored by by the trolls who troll this and other 9-11 related threads. I guess their neat little explainations can’t accomodate fires and explosions occuring prior to the planes hitting.

No surprize there, then :)

Post Modified: 05/24/06 12:41:44

R167979
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

such as lift-shafts that didn’t run the height of the building

Somewhere in this thread, quite a few months ago, I put up a great article about how the elevators were constructed, it wasn’t about whether fire travelled down the elevator shafts, it was an article separate from 9-11, but I guess some people did not put 2 and 2 together.


R167981
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Who are these trolls, defenders of the faith, protectors of the “fairy tale” 9-11 Commission Report, they have made it their religion to defend it, but it is not worthy of their effort.

Post Modified: 05/24/06 13:17:46

R167995
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

“It just doesn’t pass the test of reasonableness,” he said.
Government conspiracy myths have a long history in popular culture, Farley said, but now kooky ideas spread like wildfire with the millions of Internet users online and few qualified authorities to vet outrageous claims.
“The Internet just feeds (conspiracy claims),” he said. “In a world of information overload, it’s getting harder and harder to separate the wheat from the chaff.”

The most intelligent thing in the entire article.

“they have made it their religion to defend it, but it is not worthy of their effort.”

As usual, toolbagman associates not buying into his shit-dumb theories with defending the 9/11 commission whitewash.

Christ, toolbag, are you ever gonna learn the difference?

Distinguishing between two things is usually what you learn in preschool.

I guess you’re not beyond that, which makes it easy to see how you can buy into bullshit.


R168012
4 years ago
carcinogen

I don’t think it’s entirely bullshit. In my mind it holds some validity and demands further investigation…


R168201
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

I’m sorry sensess, you don’t know what you are talking about, for example, this statement that Farley made,

“It starts with a mistrust of government,” he said. “They don’t like Bush.”

Sounds like a statement that IF2 would make, and it does not take into account many many people, who not only believe that 9-11 was an inside job, but these people myself included, don’t blame it on Bush, many of us are Nader voters, some don’t vote at all, and believe that the people who carried out 9-11 are much more powerful that George W. Bush. For example, here is an exchange between ex-Marine fighter pilot, Joel Skousen, and Art Bell on the Coast-to-Coast radio show, over a year and a half ago. Art Bell was bucking Skousen all through the program, because he like you, cannot believe that his government carried out the 9-11 attacks.

Art Bell asked Skousen what he thought about President Bush. Skousen said he is a good script reader. Skousen said the 911 attack was carried out by dark side elements of the U.S. government. When Bell again expressed frustration, Skousen reminded him that government agents took out JFK.

So this shows you how much this Farley character knows about conspiracy people, it is just a pathetic attempt to paint conspiracy people as one kind, a stereotype, and it is bound to fail.


R168202
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

And btw, if anybody can decipher this sentence, let me know.

As usual, toolbagman associates not buying into his shit-dumb theories with defending the 9/11 commission whitewash.


R168203
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Here is the whole article I wrote,

Skousen Talked About 911 Anomalies
Wed, 17 Nov 2004

Joel Skousen, publisher and principle author of the World Affairs Brief, who appeared on Coast to Coast with Art Bell last Sunday night, told Bell that there are too many anomalies when it comes to 911. One of the biggest and most obvious concerns the government’s claim that Al Queda carried out an amazing precision attack on 911 but has not been able to set off as much as a car bomb since then; despite the fact that our borders are open. Skousen, who was a marine fighter pilot during the Vietnam era, told Bell that it is very odd that the plane that supposedly flew into the pentagon was supposed to have largely disintegrated but managed to penetrate three rings. He thought it was odd that there were pools of molten metal at the bottom of WTC 1 and 2, because the buildings were supposed to have fallen down, and he said, we should have found bent steel. These pools, he said, indicated thermite charges. But Skowsen’s main point, as he was challenged by a seemingly incredulous Art Bell, was that there are “facts on the ground” which are not disputable like the witnesses in Pennslyvania, who saw Flight 93 explode in the air. The government is withholding crucial evidence, Skousen said, such as two videos of the pentagon crash.

Art Bell asked Skousen what he thought about President Bush. Skousen said he is a good script reader. Skousen said the 911 attack was carried out by dark side elements of the U.S. government. When Bell again expressed frustration, Skousen reminded him that government agents took out JFK.

Let me add this. In the 1970s, Congress investigated the CIA and discovered a program called ZR Rifle, which the CIA used to assassinate foreign leaders. Oddly enough, Congress found out that the CIA used the same program to assassinate our president. So much for democracy!


R168204
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

“It just doesn’t pass the test of reasonableness,” he said.
Government conspiracy myths have a long history in popular culture, Farley said, but now kooky ideas spread like wildfire with the millions of Internet users online and few qualified authorities to vet outrageous claims.
“The Internet just feeds (conspiracy claims),” he said. “In a world of information overload, it’s getting harder and harder to separate the wheat from the chaff.”

Like I said, suitcase, it’s the most intelligent thing said in the entire article.

Not sure what you are trying to tell me that relates to that quote.


R168270
4 years ago
Chickenma1

senss, would you please explain to me how anything that’s happened on a federal level since the 2000 election qualifies in any way as “reasonable”.


R168276
4 years ago
Rasputin

“Government conspiracy myths have a long history in popular culture”

LOL. They also have a long history in reality, numbskull. Even government officials admit this — and they’re trained to lie. Ever heard of MKULTRA? Paperclip? Artichoke? Garden Plot? (no pun intended) Mockingbird? Northwoods?

I’m amazed that people as dumb as you exist.

Do you wear a bib?

Post Modified: 05/25/06 03:11:51

R168348
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Thank god somebody else showed up to shout this person down, the caliber of the anti-conspiracy theorists people has definitely gone down over the past year. No this kid doesn’t seem to know any history at all. It must be nice to be that ignorant.

I think he is trying to get his first article published on GNN. He is frustrated.

Post Modified: 05/25/06 07:35:55

R168365
4 years ago
whateveryousay

the caliber of the anti-conspiracy theorists people has definitely gone down over the past year. —suit

i don’t know. schnubs was pretty fucking dumb to try and maintain some of the things he did. like, for example, seriously thinking that the sun shines from the south and the north at the same time… sheesh.


R168421
4 years ago
Briefcaseman

What happened to him?


R168674
4 years ago
Chickenma1

Yeah, Schneibster was what kept this thread going – where is he?


R168687
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

OL. They also have a long history in reality, numbskull. Even government officials admit this—and they’re trained to lie. Ever heard of MKULTRA? Paperclip? Artichoke? Garden Plot? (no pun intended) Mockingbird? Northwoods?

Um, do you know how to differentiate between myth and reality?

Where in God’s name did you get the idea that MKULTRA means that all conspiracy myths are now real?


R168977
4 years ago
whateveryousay

Yeah, Schneibster was what kept this thread going ? —chick

i actually would heap a bit more credit for that onto shogo. at least from where i sit.

What happened to him ? —brief

considering the nature of his off-topic freak-out rant activity shortly before his most recent hiatus(?)
i’d say banned.
or perhaps a “self-enforced” ban is in place.

.

as for me. in the process of moving to a new place. what fun! it’s like cleaning but without cleaning. i mean if i was rich i’d just say “my house is messy, kjnock it down and build me a new one” then i wouldn’t have to clean anything at all.

the WTC of course remains a mystery. maybe tyler durden did it.

for me, i think that greening and s. jones (though they disagree) are on the right track.

the whole blame “The Government” routine is fine and all, but totally misses the point… like if you want people to be fearful, hopeless, and anti-political then you can blame everything on “The Government”. you can blame gravity on “The Government” if you want.

a simple, “we are the government” attitude would be much more refreshing.


R168988
4 years ago
carcinogen

[random talking point]

I win.


R169018
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

And now this Moussaoui thing, what happens to his legend? Was that a real OBL tape? What is this campaign all about?


R169020
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Conspiracy Central had some talk about shills.


R169054
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

The connection is made between Congress and the 9-11 Truth Movement,

Rep. Curt Weldon Provides Link to Film Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime in Recent Press Release Denies Endorsement

It has been confirmed from the editors of Orb Standard that Congressman Curt Weldon sent out an electronic press release through his press office, containing a direct link to the independent film?Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime.

“The original was simply a link with the google address – nothing else. Later he sent out this email stating he was not endorsing it.” – Adam Roufberg – Editor of Orb Standard

Although details are sketchy at this time, a follow-up disclaimer was provided by Weldon’s press office that his earlier press release did not constitute an endorsement of the film:

Earlier today, I sent out an email with the link below attached. Some of you have since inquired as to whether or not this was an endorsement of the video. It was not.

The film’s producer, John Albanese, expressed mixed feelings over the mixed messages:

It appears to me that Representative Weldon wants people to watch this film. The very fact that he released a Press Release with a direct link to this film, sans any caveats of any kind, or any other content at all for that matter, implicitly suggests that he wished for this film to be viewed.

And the fact that his follow-up disclaimer yet AGAIN included a direct link to my film is a curious choice which suggests to me that Representative Curt Weldon is pointing the general public in the direction of this film.

- John Albanese

9-11 Blogger. Curt Weldon Provides Link to Film Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime in Recent Press Release Denies Endorsement

It has been confirmed from the editors of Orb Standard that Congressman Curt Weldon sent out an electronic press release through his press office, containing a direct link to the independent film?Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime.

“The original was simply a link with the google address – nothing else. Later he sent out this email stating he was not endorsing it.” – Adam Roufberg – Editor of Orb Standard

Although details are sketchy at this time, a follow-up disclaimer was provided by Weldon’s press office that his earlier press release did not constitute an endorsement of the film:

Earlier today, I sent out an email with the link below attached. Some of you have since inquired as to whether or not this was an endorsement of the video. It was not.

The film’s producer, John Albanese, expressed mixed feelings over the mixed messages:

It appears to me that Representative Weldon wants people to watch this film. The very fact that he released a Press Release with a direct link to this film, sans any caveats of any kind, or any other content at all for that matter, implicitly suggests that he wished for this film to be viewed.

And the fact that his follow-up disclaimer yet AGAIN included a direct link to my film is a curious choice which suggests to me that Representative Curt Weldon is pointing the general public in the direction of this film.

- John Albanese


R169055
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

R170670
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

9/11: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future — Conference 6/2-4

The 9/11 truth movement has gained enormous credibility and momentum in 2006, as evidenced by results of last week’s 911Truth.org-commissioned Zogby poll. Help us build that momentum into a political force that will carry us to success.

9/11 truth offers the greatest opportunity in modern history for courageous, ethical people to positively influence the future of humanity. We hope to achieve no less than a return to Constitutional rule with the re-establishment of our precious civil liberties, the end of fraudulent wars and true justice for all the victims. We should act on this opportunity with gratitude and intelligence, sounding an alarm as well as a declaration that we are free and in charge of our own destiny as awakened and empowered citizens shaping a better world.

This conference offers an intensive weekend of presentations, strategy sessions and abundant opportunities for the growing 9/11 truth movement to gather. We are very pleased to announce commitments from approximately 45 presenters, (see Speakers page for list) and media coverage by INN World Report, KPFA Berkeley, KPFK LA, TVNewsLies.org, Chicago IndyMedia and others, as well as many individuals who have taken up the call to “become the media” and will be recording the events for dissemination afterwards.

Thanks to the generosity of an astounding, talented volunteer (see Cyber-Cypher.com), we have created a separate website at 911RevealingTheTruth.org, with full information on the conference: Full schedule for the weekend, registration and lodging info, speaker bios and presentation descriptions.

We will begin posting multimedia from the event online as soon as possible afterwards, so if you are not able to join us in Chicago, you’ll be able to experience many of these great workshops online!

This event requires significant resources, as you can imagine, and we are extremely grateful for the contributions we have received. If you have not yet done so, please consider making a contribution to 911Truth.org to assist in this effort. We appreciate and need every penny you can send!

The full 911Truth.org Steering Committee will be at the event, several of whom will be presenting, and we hope to meet many of you in Chicago!

911 Truth

Post Modified: 05/29/06 22:57:42

R170879
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

The 9/11 truth movement has gained enormous credibility and momentum in 2006, as evidenced by results of last week’s 911Truth.org-commissioned Zogby poll

So does creationism with every poll done on the american public.

You guys gotta start holding more confrences. I’ll bet the creationists are beating you on that 10 to 1.


R170894
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Canada’s “Maclean’s” magazine posted a cautionary article about those pesky 9/11 truthseekers, the Scholars for 9/11 Truth in the May 15th, 2006 issue.

The article is now viewable online; “Hijacking the Truth on 9/11”

Framed as a hit piece by the magazine editor, (the online version doesn’t even extend the courtesy of a hyperlink to ST911), the writer, Jonathon Gatehouse still manages to allow some of the alternative theories see the light of day.

Read it and form your own conclusions, and of course, write the editor(s);

letters@macleans.ca

Although not posted online, Gatehouse’s email address is publically available in the print edition;

9-11 Blogger


R170895
4 years ago
Suitcaseman

Explore Truth About 911

Have questions about the official 9/11 conspiracy theory? Come to “9/11 Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future,” the international educational and strategy conference, on June 2-4 at Embassy Suites Hotel, Rosemont.

The 9/11 truth movement has gained enormous credibility and momentum in 2006. It offers the greatest opportunity in modern history for courageous, ethical people to positively influence the future of humanity.

An intensive weekend will be offered, including workshops, presentations, strategy sessions and abundant opportunities for the growing 9/11-truth movement to come together.

To register, share rooms or rides, and for more information, go to www.911revealingthetruth.org

“We the People” deserve to know the truth and, as true patriots, need to demand it for justice and our freedom’s sake! The 9/11 commission didn’t even touch on some of the victims’ families questions.

Post Modified: 05/30/06 14:42:50

R170897
4 years ago
YT_

The topic of the thread is the destruction of the WTC.


R170965
4 years ago
senssensibilityr

I also asked him why there is not even one word about the mysterious collapse of World Trade Center building 7 in the 9/11 Commission Report

There isn’t anything on UFOs abducting the real planes either. I’ll just get some academics I know to start a “Scholars for 9/11 TWOOF about UFOS.” Then we’ll be legit, ‘cuz we have “academics” on our side.

Why isn’t my theory being represented in the commission report!?!!?!?

Why aren’t my “alternative” theories about creation being represented in science textbooks?!!?!?

Boo hoo lets all cry in a corner.

The topic of the thread is the destruction of the WTC

I thought this thread was all about getting the “twoof” out about 9/11.

It offers the greatest opportunity in modern history for courageous, ethical people to positively influence the future of humanity

You guys are a fucking joke.


R170976
4 years ago
YT_

I thought

doubt it


R170993
4 years ago
whateveryousay

senssensibilityr,

that was kind of a lame post.


R170995
4 years ago
neverknwo

R171000
4 years ago
YT_

Cool video, never. There’s at least one clip where you can see those same kind of sparks on either WTC 1 or 2, forget which. And of course they were described by many of the firefighters and rescue workers.

No comments:

Post a Comment